Military Review

Half a Century Evolution of ATGM TOW

84

An early layout of the future TOW ATGM, mid-60s. Photo US Army


In 1970, the US Army adopted the latest anti-tank missile system BGM-71A TOW. It could be used in a portable or self-propelled form, its operation was not difficult, and a guided missile could fight modern tanks. Over time, this ATGM repeatedly modernized with the growth of the main characteristics. In addition, the list of customers and operators has been constantly expanding.

Early rockets


The first to enter service was an ATGM with a basic missile type BGM-71A. It implemented the basic principles that determined both the high combat capabilities of the complex and influenced its further development. In the mid-seventies, the BGM-71B missile was adopted, which had minimal differences from the base sample.

The BGM-71A / B missiles were built according to the normal aerodynamic design; they had a length of 1,17 m and a starting weight of 18,9 kg. The head of the hull was given over to the warhead, behind it was a solid-fuel engine with side oblique nozzles, and the tail compartment accommodated control equipment. The first types of missiles developed speeds of up to 280 m / s and carried a warhead weighing 3,9 kg (2,4 kg of explosive), penetrating up to 430 mm of armor.


Serial launcher during launch. The unwinding control cable is visible. Photo US Army

At TOW, a semi-automatic guidance system with a wired control system was used from the very beginning. The ATGM operator had to keep the aiming mark on the target, and the automation independently determined the position of the rocket along the tracer and kept it on the desired trajectory. On board the missile, the commands were transmitted over a thin cable. On the BGM-71A there was a coil with 3 km of wire; in modification "B" managed to wind an additional 750 m.

Both missiles were intended for use on land ATGMs and as part of the armament of helicopters. In the latter case, BGM-71B was considered more convenient with an increased flight range, which reduced the risks for the carrier helicopter. However, this did not exclude the use of both modifications on any available platforms. Both in the USA and in other countries, TOW ATGMs were actively used on a wide variety of vehicles.

Evolutionary process


By 1981, the US military mastered the updated Improved TOW ATGM with the BGM-71C missile. The main innovation was an improved warhead demolition system. Contact fuse placed on a telescopic rod in front of the head of the rocket. After the start, the bar opened and the fuse was removed from the warhead, providing an optimal distance of detonation. Due to this, penetration at the same charge mass was brought up to 630 mm. The controls have improved, but the principles of action have not changed.


Rocket BGM-71A / B in the context. Wikimedia Commons Photos

In 1983, the production of the ATGM BGM-71D TOW-2 began. It introduced modern digital control systems with increased resistance to countermeasures. The rocket became heavier and received an enhanced 5,9-kg warhead with a penetration of at least 850 mm; An extended three-section fuse bar was also used. Due to the use of a more powerful engine, the flight characteristics of a heavier rocket remained at the level of previous samples.

In the second half of the eighties, the army received a missile BGM-71E TOW-2A, capable of hitting armored objects with dynamic protection. To initiate a remote sensing, a 300-g lead charge is installed on the fuse rod; its presence is compensated by the ballast weight in the tail of the rocket. The main warhead remains the same, but detonation algorithms have been finalized. The on-board equipment was improved, a new pulse tracer was used.

Half a Century Evolution of ATGM TOW
Missiles of the family, from left to right: BGM-71A, BGM-71C, BGM-71F, BGM-71B and BGM-71E. Photo US Army

In the early nineties, the BGM-71F missile appeared with a fundamentally new military equipment. She received two warheads with a total mass of 6,14 kg, emitting so-called impact core down when flying over the target. The combination of magnetic and laser target sensors determines the presence of an armored object, after which both charges are triggered with a minimum interval. The defeat of the target is made in the least protected projection. The specifics of the use of such a rocket forced to refine the guidance of the ground part of the ATGM. Due to the new engine and coil with cable, the range was brought up to 4,5 km.

Since the mid-nineties, work was underway to create a rocket with a high-explosive fragmentation warhead to destroy protected structures. The finished product BGM-71H appeared only in the middle of the two thousandth. It is capable of hitting targets at ranges up to 4,2 km and punching reinforced concrete structures with a thickness of 200 mm.


Launch missiles from the launcher on the HMMWV chassis. Photo US Army

In the 2s, new anti-tank systems appeared called the TOW-XNUMXB Aero. In these projects, it was possible to increase the flight range and some other characteristics. In addition, one of the projects involved the use of radio command control instead of wired. It was assumed that such an ATGM variant has great prospects in the context of helicopter armament.

In production and operation


ATGM family TOW entered service with the United States in 1970, and soon began their export. Production of modern modifications continues to this day; serial products go to the US Army and foreign customers. Some deliveries were carried out as part of full-fledged commercial contracts, others in the form of military assistance.

For half a century, several tens of thousands of TOW launchers have been produced in all versions, from portable to aviation... The total number of missiles manufactured is at the level of 700-750 thousand pieces. The bulk of these products remained in the United States. Iran made a small contribution to the total output. At one time, he bought American ATGMs, and after the revolution, he set up their unlicensed production - this is how the Tufan products appeared.


Self-propelled ATGM M901 with an armored launcher. Photo US Army

Currently, TOW different versions are in service with more than 40 countries. In addition, in recent local conflicts, weapon actively used by various non-state and illegal armed groups. In general, at the moment, TOW family missiles are one of the most popular anti-tank weapons in the world.

Reasons for popularity


ATGM BGM-71A TOW entered service with the U.S. Army due to the successful balance of all the basic characteristics and compliance with customer requirements. It was a fairly simple and reliable complex, capable of combating the characteristic threats of its time. Due to this, TOW quickly became the main ATGM of the American army.

The complex had a high modernization potential, and it continues to be used until now. Old modifications gradually gave way to new ones, which made it possible to obtain an increase in combat qualities without all the difficulties associated with the complete replacement of weapons. The most important factor was the compatibility of anti-tank systems with various carriers, including fundamentally different classes.


The technical staff of the ILC carries out the installation and alignment of the M220 launcher for the aircraft version of the TOW. Photo by US MC

The reasons for the popularity of BGM-71 abroad are obvious. The United States offered the Allies a good and inexpensive modern anti-tank missile system, and they took the opportunity. Commercial success among partner countries has become good advertising, and other states have become interested in the complex.

As for local conflicts of recent times, in them the spread of TOW is associated with its availability in a particular region. Irregular formations use only those weapons that they can get on their own or from allies. The latter factor, for example, explains the widespread occurrence of TOW in Syria.

However, in recent decades, the situation on the ATGM market has been changing, and TOW products are gradually losing popularity. On the international market there are several other lines of similar weapons, built on other principles and having the most serious advantages. Even later TOWs cannot always compete with modern Spike or Cornet complexes.


A pretty used TOW launcher along with other trophies taken from terrorists in Syria. Author photo

The secret in a successful combination


BGM-71 TOW is a good anti-tank system, which for several decades has remained relevant from a technical point of view. In addition, he shows what results a favorable combination of a successful design, sufficient characteristics, economic and political factors can produce. Without all this, TOWs would hardly have become so popular and widespread.

The development of TOW ATGM continued for several decades and gave very interesting results. However, half a century has passed since the first samples of the family appeared, and much has changed since then. The missiles of the BGM-71 family no longer fully meet modern requirements and may require replacement. However, while the rejection of TOW is not expected. These weapons are supplemented with modern samples, but are not decommissioned. So do developed armies and various gangs. It seems like a half century anniversary история and the evolution of the ATGM family will not end.
Author:
84 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Zaurbek
    Zaurbek 13 July 2020 06: 17 New
    +1
    Why can't Tou compete with Cornet? Spikes, okay ...
    1. alma
      alma 13 July 2020 06: 51 New
      15
      Quote: Zaurbek
      Why can't Tou compete with Cornet?

      The article says: "they can not always compete." In the case of the Cornet, probably because of the price.
      1. vkl.47
        vkl.47 13 July 2020 07: 55 New
        +6
        It is very huge. The position of the shooter can be seen with the naked eye. (I exaggerate)
        1. 3danimal
          3danimal 13 July 2020 21: 47 New
          -1
          But he does not betray himself in preparation for the launch. The laser irradiation sensor will not work on it.
          1. Usher
            Usher 14 July 2020 12: 29 New
            +1
            In size!
            1. 3danimal
              3danimal 14 July 2020 14: 10 New
              -3
              Other ATGMs also have dimensions. Cornet is not launched from the shoulder.
              There are advantages for the lungs - Javelin, Spike MR.
              1. Usher
                Usher 14 July 2020 16: 04 New
                0
                Well, why are you stupid? Saw Cornet and TOU? The difference is 2-3 times in size, what are you doing? And here Javelin and Spike, it's not about them.
                1. 3danimal
                  3danimal 14 July 2020 20: 55 New
                  -1
                  What are the dimensions? Is the rocket 2-3 times longer? Or thicker maybe?
                  The length of the Cornet is 1,2 m, TOW-2 is 1,17-1,53 ​​m (without / with a bar). Caliber -130-152mm (there are different options).
    2. English tarantas
      English tarantas 13 July 2020 09: 09 New
      +1
      We do ok Google and look at the characteristics of Cornet. The main advantage in the range of destruction, TOU in this discipline is limited to a coil with a wire, and a radio command missile was made for helicopters, and was never accepted.
      1. Zaurbek
        Zaurbek 13 July 2020 09: 42 New
        +5
        And the latest versions of the wire do not have .... and there are rockets that Cornet does not have.
        1. Grazdanin
          Grazdanin 13 July 2020 10: 06 New
          +7
          Americans do not like to change the name of the weapon. We already had 4-5 different names. What was done in the 70s has nothing to do with current developments. Therefore, confusion.
        2. English tarantas
          English tarantas 13 July 2020 12: 57 New
          +2
          The Americans did not accept the version without wires (!). What kind of missiles does Cornet have? The Cornet has two cumulative missiles and one with a high-explosive warhead. The range of targets is fully covered. TOW, fortunately, only missiles with cumulative warheads are available. A TOW-2B missile with shock nuclei can be ineffective due to the magnetic target sensor and the installation of DZ on the roof.
          1. Zaurbek
            Zaurbek 13 July 2020 16: 32 New
            +3
            DZ on the roof will not save anything.
          2. 3danimal
            3danimal 13 July 2020 21: 48 New
            -2
            And how many tanks are there that have DZ on the roof? smile
            1. English tarantas
              English tarantas 13 July 2020 23: 19 New
              +1
              At a minimum, Soviet MBTs with DZ have it on part of the roof.
              1. 3danimal
                3danimal 14 July 2020 01: 35 New
                -1
                Seriously? Give at least one example of DZ on the ROOF of Soviet tanks.
                1. Usher
                  Usher 14 July 2020 12: 31 New
                  0
                  Are you serious? T-90/72/64/80 are those tanks that have DZ on the roof in different variations of Contact-1/5 and Relic.
                  1. 3danimal
                    3danimal 14 July 2020 14: 10 New
                    -1
                    At least one photo where the roof of the tower, the commander’s hatch are covered by them.
                    1. Usher
                      Usher 14 July 2020 16: 03 New
                      -1
                      Do you have dry hands? Maybe for you and go to the toilet? Google on what? And since when did the tou flies into the hatch. Hatches are not for the whole tower. At this time, you don’t need tanks at all to make them pierce through the hatch, pierce into the forehead. What to do then?
                      1. 3danimal
                        3danimal 15 July 2020 03: 32 New
                        -1
                        Kinetics hits the forehead during the battle.
                        On a few photos are visible "microkitrikami" RE, laid out in places around the tower. There remains a good open area for defeat. Complete protection of the roof - no and cannot be.
                    2. Sanichsan
                      Sanichsan 14 July 2020 22: 26 New
                      0
                      Do you have at least one photo of equipment struck by this miracle rocket in combat conditions? or is it just cool on paper? laughing
          3. Koluj
            Koluj 5 August 2020 08: 11 New
            0
            > TOW-2B missile with impact cores may be ineffective due to the magnetic target sensor and installation of remote sensing on the roof
            Protection from shock nuclei was declared only for malachite.
    3. Crabong
      Crabong 13 July 2020 10: 17 New
      0
      According to the characteristics and price.
      1. Zaurbek
        Zaurbek 13 July 2020 10: 25 New
        +2
        The penultimate version of the rocket breaks in the same way as the Cornet, the latter hits from above with two charges .... About optics and infrared sight, you need to compare. But the Russian Federation is not a leader in these areas.
        1. English tarantas
          English tarantas 13 July 2020 13: 08 New
          0
          And what will optics and IR give you if one complex can launch a rocket at a maximum of 3,75 km (really a little less, and the other complex at 10 km (also really a little less). It seems to me that at the distances of the TOU complex, Cornet optics.
          1. Zaurbek
            Zaurbek 13 July 2020 16: 30 New
            -2
            Well, you can either see the target or not see.
            1. English tarantas
              English tarantas 13 July 2020 18: 01 New
              0
              It seems to me that at the distances of the TOU complex, Cornet is not inferior to him in terms of optics.
          2. 3danimal
            3danimal 13 July 2020 21: 50 New
            -1
            There are very few situations (and localities) when you have to fire from an ATGM at a distance of more than 4km.
            1. English tarantas
              English tarantas 13 July 2020 23: 24 New
              +3
              I don’t know, so I personally live in a place where 10km of direct line of sight is not uncommon, and as far as I remember in Russia such a territory from the Don to the Urals (river). And there is the Middle East with its deserts and semi-deserts, and mountainous areas where from one slope to the opposite can easily be 10 km (and usually happens). Well, the most commonplace, come to a hilly area and climb a hill, or just onto a balcony / roof of a high-rise building and estimate how many kilometers you can view, even without looking at the trees and bends of the landscape.
              Oh, and another 4km is not a TOU distance, re-read the article, it indicates the maximum range of TOU missiles - 3,75km, and this is covered by the FPS and TOUR range of all modern tanks.
        2. Sanichsan
          Sanichsan 14 July 2020 22: 30 New
          0
          Quote: Zaurbek
          The penultimate version of the rocket breaks in the same way as the Cornet, the latter hits from above with two charges ...

          the results of the combat use of Cornet are known, but what about these "two cores"? it’s very similar to “the most reliable cure for flies” when you need to catch a fly, tear off its wings, sprinkle the product on her head and in a few hours the fly will surely die ...
  2. Alex 1970
    Alex 1970 13 July 2020 07: 19 New
    +3
    How awesome he is! After the shot, immediately fleeing leaving the launcher, or can you take this bandura away? Judging by the size of a great target! Although she is toothy, she shoots up to 4 km!
  3. The leader of the Redskins
    The leader of the Redskins 13 July 2020 07: 23 New
    +5
    We were told at the school (as it turned out later, by mistake) that TOW is translated as a "toy".
    Well, I didn’t know the English spelling teacher! laughing
    But, in general, the TOU, RPG7 and Karl Gustov are long-livers of the "infantry artillery."
  4. Zeev
    Zeev zeev 13 July 2020 09: 20 New
    +3
    I think that TOW will not leave the arena for a long time. Production is established, the cost due to large-scale production is not high, and even relatively low armor penetration, which at the moment of history does not allow confidently defeating modern main battle tanks, is not an obstacle to the widespread use of this ATGM against older or lighter armored vehicles, firing points, advanced command items and other tasty goals.
    1. Zaurbek
      Zaurbek 13 July 2020 09: 44 New
      +2
      Penetration in 150mm caliber easily catch up.
      1. garri-lin
        garri-lin 13 July 2020 10: 02 New
        +2
        It’s strange why they didn’t. Having a diameter of 152,4 mm, armor penetration can be brought up to 1000 - 1200. The question is only in price.
        1. Zaurbek
          Zaurbek 13 July 2020 10: 28 New
          +3
          They can launch a rocket that hits from above. Why would she beat 1200mm. And the bulk of our tanks do not have such protection. Enough and 800mm.
          1. garri-lin
            garri-lin 13 July 2020 11: 45 New
            +1
            Our yes. But Tou is widely exported. And precedents when American missiles are fired at American tanks in a non-American conflict are present. Although about the assassin, you're right. A lot more effective.
            1. Zaurbek
              Zaurbek 13 July 2020 16: 31 New
              +1
              Western TOP technology, few NATO countries have ....
              1. garri-lin
                garri-lin 13 July 2020 20: 07 New
                -1
                The issue of export earnings. Although if they look closely, they do not need profit. Status Only
  5. Nikolaevich I
    Nikolaevich I 13 July 2020 09: 22 New
    +2
    There are also prototypes of PT-based PT missiles ... For example, with laser-guided ... supersonic ... even hypersonic kinetic with quasi-liquid propellant rocket engines on gel-like fuel ...
  6. 5-9
    5-9 13 July 2020 09: 57 New
    0
    What a healthy launcher .... and the PSU was always inferior to ours ...
    1. 3danimal
      3danimal 13 July 2020 21: 52 New
      -1
      Watching which versions, you need to look at the years of release.
      And the option with a hit in the roof is no less effective than - 1000mm on board at Cornet.
      1. English tarantas
        English tarantas 13 July 2020 23: 36 New
        0
        Less than two pieces of metal or several kilograms of cumulative warheads, what will break a thin sheet of armor more effectively?
        1. 3danimal
          3danimal 14 July 2020 01: 40 New
          -3
          Equally. After all, a few kilograms of warheads are needed to ... form a thin stream of metal that “erodes” the frontal / side armor. (Let me remind you that “shock nuclei” are not two balls in a rocket smile )
          1. Sanichsan
            Sanichsan 14 July 2020 22: 44 New
            +1
            Quote: 3danimal
            After all, a few kilograms of warheads are needed to ... form a thin stream of metal that “erodes” the frontal / side armor.

            that is, do you assume that with the detonation of several kilo warheads, they all go to the formation of a cumulative jet? like the whole explosion pulled into this "thin stream"? you have an interesting worldview what
            Quote: 3danimal
            Let me remind you that “shock nuclei” are not two balls in a rocket

            yes in the end just 2 balls. the fact that before the explosion it was copper plates does not change the essence of the matter.
            and most importantly, the results of the combat use of Cornet are known to all, but the results of the use of this missile with cores are not. request dubious enthusiasm yes
            1. 3danimal
              3danimal 15 July 2020 12: 36 New
              -1
              The results will be, over time. The right decision is that there are two charges, more likely to hit something important.
              1. Sanichsan
                Sanichsan 15 July 2020 12: 39 New
                0
                Quote: 3danimal
                The results will be, over time.

                same as railgun? close and write off? well, OK. a negative result is also a result request
      2. 5-9
        5-9 14 July 2020 09: 19 New
        +3
        Always inferior ... in the godfather of the USSR he knew best. And keep in mind that the Soviet BP assessment methodology is tougher and provides somewhere around 20% smaller millimeters than the NATO one for the same ammunition.
        The variant with UY appeared just because he didn’t take our tanks in the forehead ... and on the VLD and the roof we have DZ and the armored effect of UY is low.
        Cornet has 1400 mm (1200 from the export one) and he takes any tank (except possibly the T-14) into the strongest zone forehead, there’s nothing to say about the side — it will be sewn to the other side.
        1. 3danimal
          3danimal 14 July 2020 10: 21 New
          -3
          I recall the embarrassment in the 60s when it turned out that the Soviet methodology for calculating the penetration of Western guns (we are talking about 100mm L7) underestimates this penetration. And it is approximately equal to the Soviet 115mm.
          Of course, our modern techniques are the most honest (why do we need advertising, there is absolutely no desire to sell products).
          And where did you get the presence of DZ on the roof of the tower ??? Which tanks? T-90, T-72B3 - only in front / side of the tower. Maybe on the hatch? smile
          1. 5-9
            5-9 14 July 2020 10: 38 New
            +2
            About L7 there was a lack of data and it was speculation and theorizing ....
            But the Soviet methodology says that penetration - when 75% of the fragments are behind the armored barrier, and the western - 50% is already penetration ... that is. according to our methodology, one shell counts one armor that does not penetrate, but according to them with the same shell and armor it penetrates.

            In the USSR, they always kept secret, and if they were not classified, they underestimated their performance characteristics ... to sell then the goal was not set ...
            1. 3danimal
              3danimal 14 July 2020 14: 12 New
              -1
              In a cumulative charge, no fragments penetrate through the armor. Penetration (“flushing” with a jet) is either there or not.
              1. 5-9
                5-9 14 July 2020 15: 05 New
                0
                Stabbing sooner ... with it, fragments of armor also form .... therefore, the absence of shell fragments, the armored effect of the kuma is much lower than that of the OBPS
                1. 3danimal
                  3danimal 14 July 2020 15: 25 New
                  -4
                  Kum. the jet rather rinses the armor, like hot water snow. And a minimum of fragments
                  1. Sanichsan
                    Sanichsan 14 July 2020 23: 00 New
                    +1
                    Quote: 3danimal
                    Kum. the jet rather rinses the armor, like hot water snow.

                    learn the materiel. the cumulative jet breaks through the armor due to colossal pressure. as a result of this pressure, the effect of flow occurs in metals. the temperature of the facing piercing armor is about 600-700 degrees. it is lower than the temperature of the BOPS warming up to 1000 degrees.
                    after breaking through the armor, fragments of armor and detonation products fly inside, which provides a damaging effect. look at the hole from the cumulative section. it is a cone with a small hole outside and a noticeably larger hole inside. all this metal from the cone flies inside, and the detonation products entering inside are enough to throw the tank commander through the open hatch, if the hatch is certainly open. if closed then the khan’s crew. request
                    this is how it looks:

                    Do you still think that cumulating is like poking a needle? bully
                    1. 3danimal
                      3danimal 15 July 2020 05: 22 New
                      -1
                      Learn the physics of the process: it doesn’t break, but rinses. There are already a certain number of fragments inside (and the residual stream of copper), but much less than during kinetic penetration.
                      1. English tarantas
                        English tarantas 15 July 2020 11: 10 New
                        +1
                        and residual stream of copper

                        It seems you are just confusing the impact core and godfather. a stream. The cladding jet (as the main damaging factor) is just the impact core.
                      2. Sanichsan
                        Sanichsan 15 July 2020 11: 39 New
                        0
                        Quote: English Tarantas
                        The cladding jet (as the main damaging factor) is just the impact core.

                        the impact core is still the core formed by explosion from the plate. not a jet at all. there is no pressure leading to the effect of fluidity of metals. request
                        the guy doesn’t confuse anything. he was just stuck in the illusions composed by players in the WOT and the tundra request
                      3. English tarantas
                        English tarantas 16 July 2020 13: 29 New
                        0
                        there is no pressure leading to the effect of fluidity of metals.

                        Not seriously interested in this type of warhead. It seemed to me that the power was enough just to throw the lining not with the core, but with a stream.
                        tundra

                        Hah, I play it myself, but there fortunately the game itself doesn’t seem to confuse much, but it also doesn’t explain anything. But at least the high-explosive cumulant effect is implemented a little.
                      4. Sanichsan
                        Sanichsan 16 July 2020 14: 30 New
                        0
                        Quote: English Tarantas
                        It seemed to me that the power was enough just to throw the lining not with the core, but with a stream.

                        actually a good photo:

                        or here:

                        on the right is the plate before detonation, on the left is what happens.
                        Quote: English Tarantas
                        Hah, I play it myself, but there fortunately the game itself doesn’t seem to confuse much, but it also doesn’t explain anything. But at least the high-explosive cumulant effect is implemented a little.

                        in the tundra, the mapping of a high-explosive effect is realized, that is, certain damage over the area. the pre-casting high-explosive effect of the cumulative is not realized at all. play too. laughing
                        this is not quite what it is in reality. it’s also a game where the breech is repaired in 30 seconds and the shell is still the point. game conventions wink in reality, the kirdyk crew if they are not ready to fire the fire extinguishing system, not to mention the penetration by the godfather. if they breathe, then without a qualified doctor they will not be pumped out. pulmonary edema and dosvidos.
                      5. English tarantas
                        English tarantas 16 July 2020 15: 01 New
                        0
                        So there is a halbreak from kuma, stable and I like it)
                      6. Sanichsan
                        Sanichsan 16 July 2020 15: 55 New
                        0
                        Quote: English Tarantas
                        So there is a halbreak from kuma, stable and I like it)

                        and there’s no tanker request but this is impossible. from w and so the world of one shots laughing
                      7. English tarantas
                        English tarantas 16 July 2020 18: 12 New
                        0
                        And by the way, cumulative shells marked with a non-standard icon, for example, AMX-30 cumulative shells, according to my observations, still have a high-explosive effect.
                      8. Sanichsan
                        Sanichsan 16 July 2020 18: 18 New
                        0
                        I haven’t come in for a long time .. maybe. request
        2. Sanichsan
          Sanichsan 15 July 2020 11: 32 New
          0
          Quote: 3danimal
          There are already a certain number of fragments inside (and the residual stream of copper), but much less than during kinetic penetration.

          I specially attached a photo. in the photo hit 120mm cumulative projectile. what’s to the left of the stove is a shell explosion. what’s to the right of the stove is what’s happening inside the tank. to understand the scale of the tragedy, the height of the plate is 2 meters.
          This is a photo of the actual use of a cumulative projectile. Do your fantasies require you to ignore reality?
    2. English tarantas
      English tarantas 15 July 2020 11: 07 New
      +1
      The cumulative stream is a bunch of directed energy. In kinetic ammunition, the material that overcomes the obstacle is the projectile itself, which transfers energy to the obstacle. In cumulative ammunition, the material piercing armor is the armor itself, or rather the part of it that receives energy cum. jets.
      1. 3danimal
        3danimal 15 July 2020 11: 57 New
        -3
        Wrong. The cum jet is “as if liquid” (with monstrous pressure) copper.
        1. English tarantas
          English tarantas 16 July 2020 13: 38 New
          0
          Probably))))
  • Usher
    Usher 14 July 2020 12: 35 New
    +1
    Are you going to write your crap everywhere? Are you serious? T-90/72/64/80 are those tanks that have DZ on the roof in different variations of Contact-1/5 and Relic.
    1. 3danimal
      3danimal 15 July 2020 03: 38 New
      -2
      There are many diagrams and photos. On the same t-90, most of the roof is open. And TOU has 2 cores, for greater probability.
      Against Javelin, with a precharge - it doesn’t help at all.
  • Gloomy skeptic
    Gloomy skeptic 13 July 2020 10: 18 New
    +1
    Judging by the size, you won’t take such a shooter in your hands! This means that the grenade launcher is automatically equipped with transport and a department of loaders, so in popularity this piece of iron can only be compared with a brick sold in a dark alley around the corner. So the obsession and popularity DO NOT BE CONFUSED - this is not the same thing !!!
    1. Zaurbek
      Zaurbek 13 July 2020 10: 29 New
      +1
      But the Americans for a long time had the same anti-tank systems for both the ground forces and for mobile and for helicopters ... Unification.
    2. Razvedka_Boem
      Razvedka_Boem 13 July 2020 16: 49 New
      0
      And they did not carry her in her arms. The structure of companies and platoons in the United States is different.
      They are larger in number and in technical equipment.
      They think in other ways, because The Second World War did not concern them.
      A lot of money, no need to think about saving.
      1. 3danimal
        3danimal 13 July 2020 21: 53 New
        -2
        They then had a more powerful economy and production. Industrial records in the years of WW2 are behind them.
      2. SovAr238A
        SovAr238A 13 July 2020 22: 12 New
        +3
        Quote: Razvedka_Boem
        And they did not carry her in her arms. The structure of companies and platoons in the United States is different.


        Is it?
        Back in the 80s, it was written in the ZVO that the TOU complex was transferred by three fighters ...
        1. Razvedka_Boem
          Razvedka_Boem 15 July 2020 05: 10 New
          0
          "It can be carried over and is" carried over "- two different things.
          Once again - a complex that weighs more than 100 kg when equipped is usually installed on a vehicle.
          If necessary, it can be disassembled and removed and installed on the ground.
          If they dragged him, then a very short distance.
          The saturation of vehicles of various types in the American army is such that carrying on hand is an exception, and not a rule, for example, in the mountains. But there they will be taken to the point by helicopters.
          Therefore, I will correct your phrase - "TOU complex can be tolerated forces of calculation of three people. "
      3. Usher
        Usher 14 July 2020 12: 36 New
        -1
        who has told you these tales?
      4. Usher
        Usher 14 July 2020 16: 05 New
        0
        TOU still as dragged on hand and dragged. First find out then write.
  • Nikolaevich I
    Nikolaevich I 13 July 2020 13: 47 New
    0
    But there are also prototypes of TOW-based PT missiles ... For example, with laser-guided ... supersonic ... even hypersonic kinetic with quasi-liquid propellant rocket engines on gel-like fuel!
    1. Sanichsan
      Sanichsan 14 July 2020 23: 16 New
      0
      Quote: Nikolaevich I
      . even hypersonic kinetic with quasi-liquid propellant rocket engine on gel-like fuel!

      think about it! in the USSR another 60 laser made which burned 200mm of armor bully but both of them didn’t go into series because of complete economic inefficiency wink
  • Gloomy skeptic
    Gloomy skeptic 13 July 2020 16: 56 New
    -7
    Quote: Razvedka_Boem
    And they did not carry her in her arms. The structure of companies and platoons in the United States is different.
    They are larger in number and in technical equipment.
    They think in other ways, because The Second World War did not concern them.
    A lot of money, no need to think about saving.

    It is noticeable! As soon as the Americans are faced with bad weather, a “cold” of plus 10, or a shepherd who does not want to give away his shabby goat for free, then they immediately begin to have problems: either the rug-shirt is heavy, then the tanning lotion has the wrong degree, then without making a single Departure Aviation defeated all the barmales in Syria. And there’s a couple of videos when this shaitan-pipe hits the Russian tank, but the tank leaves after firing its own power. So the structure - the structure, and this piece of iron against taxi drivers is good, and not against real military armored vehicles.
    1. Sanichsan
      Sanichsan 14 July 2020 23: 19 New
      +1
      Quote: Gloomy Skeptic
      then the tanning lotion has the wrong degree

      no no no! you confuse. this is a british repellent mosquito repellent lol
      By the way, this is a real story.
  • SovAr238A
    SovAr238A 13 July 2020 22: 14 New
    +3
    About TOU - it's probably better to read the article "How to Become a Touman" ...
    https://lostarmour.info/articles/kak-stat-toumenom/
    Of course, with its own twists, an article - but about missiles and carriers - is much more and more interesting ....
    1. Usher
      Usher 14 July 2020 12: 40 New
      0
      What kind of terrorist site?
  • sen
    sen 14 July 2020 07: 46 New
    +2
    An interesting system of protection against interference on the TOW-2.
    To filter out interference, only tracer modulated infrared radiation is monitored at a fixed frequency. To increase the noise immunity on the TOW-2, this frequency was made variable and randomly changing during the flight of the rocket. An additional tracer was also introduced in TOW-2, generating heat as a result of the reaction of boron and titanium. The frequency of its radiation is modulated using a mechanical shutter. The long-wave infrared radiation of the thermal tracer is monitored by a thermal imaging sight (AN / TAS-4A), which provides guidance in bad weather conditions and in smoke.