The effectiveness of ATGM FGM-148 Javelin

222

The launch of the FGM-148 missile during the exercises. Photo by the US Department of Defense

American FGM-148 Javelin anti-tank missile systems have been actively used in various armed conflicts over the past two decades. This is weapon confirmed the main characteristics and showed its ability to hit various targets and solve various tasks, and also received good publicity. At the same time, practice has shown that the Javelin is not an ideal weapon, and the results of its use do not always meet expectations.

Technical potential


The future FGM-148 Javelin ATGM has been developed since the late eighties by several American companies and was adopted by the US Army in 1996. Soon after, it became one of the main anti-tank weapons in its arsenals. Export sales were also launched. To date, the FGM-148 has been adopted by two dozen countries and new orders are expected. Tens of thousands of serial products have been manufactured.



Structurally, the FGM-148 is divided into a Command Launch Unit (CLU) launcher and a transport and launch container with a missile. The container is disposable and is discarded after launch. Instead, a new one is connected to the CLU, after which the ATGM is ready for a new shot.

The CLU device is equipped with advanced optics. There is a day channel and two cooled thermal imagers with different field of view and magnification. A typical scenario for the use of anti-tank systems provides for their consistent use. The CLU also has electronics for processing and issuing data to the rocket before launch.


TPK missiles in production. Photos Lockheed Martin

The FGM-148 missile is a solid propellant munition with a cooled infrared homing head and a tandem HEAT warhead. The length of the rocket is 1,2 m, the diameter, excluding rudders, is 127 mm. Depending on the modification, the range of the missile reaches 2,5-4,7 km. Penetration is declared at the level of 700-750 mm for dynamic protection.

Ready-to-use ATGM "Javelin" has a length of approx. 1,2 m and a diameter of less than half a meter. The mass of the product is 22,3 kg, which allows it to be carried by the operator. Mounting on a tripod or mounting on vehicles is also possible.

Combat application


The first episodes of the combat use of the FGM-148 anti-tank systems in real conflicts date back to the beginning of the XNUMXs. So, a significant number of complexes were in service with the units sent to Afghanistan. The enemy practically did not use armored vehicles, and missiles were used to destroy other targets - buildings, fortifications, natural shelters, etc. In addition, CLU devices were used as a convenient multifunctional surveillance tool.

During the 2003 invasion of Iraq, US troops used the Javelin for the first time on real tanks enemy. As reported, ATGM showed high efficiency. With the help of CLU, operators easily found and took on target tracking in all conditions, and missiles were successfully aimed and hit tanks. However, it should be noted that the Iraqi army had outdated armored vehicles. The newest tanks in its units were T-72s of early modifications.


"Javelin" in the Ukrainian army. Photo by the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine

In the mid-XNUMXs, against the backdrop of a general deterioration in the situation in the Middle East and North Africa, the active use of Javelins began again. In general, such use was similar to that which had previously taken place in Afghanistan. At the same time, new goals and objectives appeared. Thus, anti-tank systems proved to be a convenient tool for combating "shahidmobiles" of suicide bombers.

Missiles for Ukraine


After 2014-15 in Ukrainian paramilitary circles, an unhealthy attitude towards American anti-tank systems has formed on the verge of a strange cult. The army desired to receive such a weapon and placed the highest hopes on it. Such desires began to come true in 2018, when the United States shipped the first batch of complexes to Ukraine. By early 2022, the Ukrainian army had several hundred CLUs and more missiles.

At the beginning of the year, foreign states began to supply Ukraine with new missiles and launchers, and after February 24, these processes intensified. According to various sources, about 7 anti-tank systems have been handed over or sold to the Ukrainian side so far. According to recent reports, this is equivalent to a third of the US Army's stockpile.

Since the end of February, the Ukrainian army has been using the FGM-148 against tanks and other armored vehicles of the army of Russia and the republics of Donbass. Ukrainian propaganda trumpets about outstanding successes and the defeat of a great number of enemy vehicles. Foreign sources, who do not share such optimism, give more modest figures. According to them, about 200-300 missiles have already been used, and a significant part of them hit their intended targets.

The effectiveness of ATGM FGM-148 Javelin

Allegedly, the use of Javelin on a Russian tank. The mise en scene indicates the staged nature of the shooting, although the successful defeat of the real target is declared. Photo bmpd.livejournal.com

However, there is no confirmation of this. In addition, the statistics of damage and loss of Russian equipment remains unknown. With all this, there are cases when Russian or republican equipment copes with an attack. Undermining the tandem warhead of an American missile predictably destroys the dynamic protection unit and damages some other details - but penetration of armor and defeat of the crew or internal units is not guaranteed. As a result, the launch is formally successful, but the tank retains mobility and combat capability.

Application and its results


It is known that the FGM-148 ATGM has a number of advantages and disadvantages. Its strengths include small dimensions and ease of use, fairly effective optoelectronic means, work on the principle of "launched and forgotten" and fairly high combat qualities. There are also disadvantages, such as the high cost of the complex and missiles, as well as a limited range.

Available data on the combat use of Javelin products allows us to more accurately determine their real potential. In general, it is easy to see that it depends not only on tabular characteristics, but also on a number of other factors. These are the features of the conflict and the range of existing goals, the specifics of the application, and even the level of training of personnel.

It is curious that the FGM-148 systems worked on tanks only in separate conflicts - during the war in Iraq and in the current Ukrainian crisis. In other cases, the missiles were used on equipment of other classes or on various structures. Such episodes are of some interest, but do not demonstrate the full potential of the complex.


Tank T-72B3 after hitting several missiles and grenades in the side hemisphere. The crew was not injured, and the tank will return to service after repairs. Photo Telegram / "Older than Edda"

Good statistics on the use of the complex in its original anti-tank capacity was obtained only in Iraq, when the targets of the missiles were obsolete tanks with a limited level of armor and without additional protection. Now the Javelins are attacking Russian armored vehicles and even inflicting some damage on them. But defeat and destruction with one shot, as in advertising, is unlikely.

This performance degradation has several causes. First of all, it is necessary to note the specifics of current events in Ukraine. Not all Ukrainian ATGM operators have the proper level of training and can effectively use their weapons. In addition, the complexes show the best results in open areas, and battles often take place in urban areas, which limit the viewing and launch range.

If the Javelin missile manages to find a target and locks on it, a hit is not guaranteed. At one time, active advertising of this ATGM attracted the attention of not only potential customers, but also designers of armored vehicles and protective equipment. It began to be considered as one of the main modern threats to tanks and was taken into account in their further development. As a result, the danger of a relatively old missile for tanks of new modifications with modern protection has been reduced.

Of interest are the quantitative indicators of the current operation of the Javelins. To date, Ukraine has received more than 7 such items, but has used only a few hundred. At the same time, a significant number of weapons were destroyed by Russian strikes along with warehouses or vehicles. In addition, some of the complexes became trophies. Such losses also have a negative impact on the overall statistics and results of combat use.

Ambiguous results


During the operation of the FGM-148 Javelin ATGM, it performed well overall. In some situations, he fully realized his potential and even went beyond the original functions, while in others the results of the application left much to be desired. An analysis of the situation shows that the effectiveness of this ATGM depends not only on the technical features and characteristics, but also on a number of other factors - from the training of the operator to the design of the target.

In general, despite all the limitations and problems, Javelin remains a modern and fairly effective anti-tank missile system. Do not underestimate him and ignore the threat he poses. At the same time, it is also not worth placing excessive hopes on the complex and making it an object of worship. However, the Ukrainian approach with a "cult" and insufficient training of operators also has positive consequences. It reduces the risks to our troops and simplifies demilitarization.
222 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. -16
    April 21 2022 04: 35
    RPG Mlyn 7 is inexpensive and effective too!
    1. +17
      April 21 2022 07: 34
      Quote: Kyrs
      RPG Mlyn 7 is inexpensive and effective too!

      These are generally different systems. grenade launcher and anti-tank missiles
      1. +1
        April 30 2022 16: 06
        In terms of efficiency - practically, classmates. For price / quality, the javelin sucks poorly
    2. -11
      April 21 2022 08: 08
      Quote: Kyrs
      RPG Mlyn 7 inexpensive and effective also

      Well, this is a miracle for $ 200 thousand, taking into account its effective destruction in warehouses and on the road, as well as capture in warehouses ... Well, it turns out very expensive ... A tank, for example, 2 lemons of green candy wrappers, and if on it ( all things considered) do you need a dozen missiles? Well, it's expensive, well...
      1. +20
        April 21 2022 09: 12
        Ten missiles? Why not two dozen? Not three? Not four?
        In general, the article is bewildering. The effectiveness of the complex is undeniable. It is enough to go even through Russian sources. But the author tries in every possible way to downplay it.
        Such a goal would have been achieved if the author had given at least a few specific figures. For example, at least the approximate percentage of surviving equipment after a rocket hit it. But there is no such data. But some kind of stat should already be accumulated in a month and a half of battles. Or no one is engaged in such an analysis?
        In general, the article is not informative. About nothing.
        1. -3
          April 21 2022 09: 22
          Quote from: Baik11
          Ten missiles? Why not two dozen? Not three? Not four?

          Read carefully. I wrote about the inefficiency of the process of getting these missiles into effective launch sites. Losses in warehouses being destroyed, abandoned in positions, etc. Well, there are many such losses ... But I don’t have data on successful launches.
          1. +7
            April 21 2022 09: 29
            I am extremely attentive and everything is in order with my eyesight.
            The comment was about a dozen missiles per tank.
            1. -4
              April 21 2022 11: 18
              Quote from: Baik11
              The comment was about a dozen missiles per tank

              An expense is an expense. You can have the perfect weapon, with XNUMX% efficiency, and you can bring to the place of use no more than one unit out of ten. This adds up to the effectiveness of the application.
          2. +3
            April 21 2022 10: 19
            Quote: Mountain Shooter
            Quote from: Baik11
            Ten missiles? Why not two dozen? Not three? Not four?

            Read carefully. I wrote about the inefficiency of the process of getting these missiles into effective launch sites. Losses in warehouses being destroyed, abandoned in positions, etc. Well, there are many such losses ... But I don’t have data on successful launches.

            That is, do you include missiles seriously destroyed at the stage of storage and transportation in the statistics of use? And the fact that they cost Ukraine for nothing? Or do you think the enemy is a fool, since their weapons are more expensive?
          3. +1
            April 21 2022 23: 14
            [quote = Mountain shooter] [quote = baik] And I don’t have data on successful launches. [/ quote]

            Oh how! One gate play ? ))) Not seriously )))
        2. -5
          April 21 2022 10: 45
          The effectiveness of the complex is undeniable. It is enough to go even through Russian sources

          Who is indisputable? )))
          If Javelin were as effective as Western propaganda extols it, then there would already be a bunch of videos and photos of its effective use.
          In addition, having repulsed the attack of armored vehicles with its help, they could go on the offensive and capture the area where the armored vehicles were hit, and photograph it from all angles. Luckily, all phones have cameras.
          But, as always, your phones are dead and you need to take your word for it.
          But before 2022, how did the Ukrainian media lie? We will burn all the tanks of the Russian Federation that will turn up on Ukraine. Well, did you burn it?
          That's all you need to know about the effectiveness of Javelin))))
          1. -3
            April 22 2022 05: 08
            Well, then the tanks were not yet in Kyiv?)))
          2. -1
            April 23 2022 18: 34
            unfortunately neither Javelin nor Cornet leave autographs, only black metal remains there. The network has a video of the use of some kind of anti-tank systems along a hinged trajectory (there seems to be no Spikes there, that means Javelin) from launch to defeat, moreover, defeat with detonation of ammunition.
        3. -7
          April 21 2022 10: 52
          Yes, the author downplays Javelin's effectiveness. But it is necessary to be objective in peacetime. But during the war it is necessary just to downplay the capabilities of the enemy in order to preserve the morale of their forces.
          1. 0
            April 22 2022 15: 56
            Quote from Zack Levy
            But during the war, it is necessary to underestimate the capabilities of the enemy in order to preserve the morale of their forces.

            So and so they downplay with terrible force. For example, when was the last time you heard about our downed planes? And in the VO telegram channel, a direct participant talks about a Su34 shot down the other day and two turntables.
            1. -2
              April 25 2022 12: 16
              They are silent about their losses and loudly emphasize the losses of the enemy (and even exaggerate them) is a normal military practice. Everyone does it.
        4. 0
          April 28 2022 21: 35
          In general, there are many options for counteracting this complex. There is such SOEP Lipa. It neutralizes the Javelin seeker as effectively as possible, completely disorienting her. In general, adapting this system for tanks is quite a trivial task.
        5. 0
          April 30 2022 16: 08
          Come on? Efficiency? Yes, and undeniable?!
          1. 0
            April 30 2022 16: 21
            Javelin is very effective with an overwhelming advantage. With air supremacy. Powerful fire support. Abundance of intelligence facilities. Guaranteed cover. (above described Iraq)
            In a collision with an equivalent enemy, and, more than aspirations, superior, efficiency rolls down to the level of RPGs. But you can't talk about it. Because it's too expensive, taxpayers won't understand...
            PS Perhaps bullshit, but I read somewhere - the heroic USMC rejected this javelin due to absolute inefficiency and uses the good old TOU with wires as more preferable.
            Although, the Marines are still fighters with progress. they have not yet written off the M14 as a Marxist one, rejecting all new developments
        6. 0
          10 May 2022 16: 15
          > efficiency is indisputable, but I will not provide you with proofs
    3. -6
      April 21 2022 09: 05
      Quote: Kyrs
      RPG Mlyn 7 is inexpensive and effective too!

      He's completely outdated. In modern conflicts, it practically does not occur.
      1. 0
        April 30 2022 16: 23
        totally outdated. In modern conflicts, it practically does not occur.
        laughing laughing lol belay
  2. -6
    April 21 2022 05: 02
    Not all Ukrainian ATGM operators have the proper level of training
    This is not a reason to relax, but everything is easier. And it also allows us to believe that the advertised deliveries of English MANPADS will not bring much success, even more serious operator training is required there!
    1. -4
      April 21 2022 05: 27
      Yes, the javelin operator does not need any special training! Everything is quite simple there.
      1. +4
        April 21 2022 05: 42
        Quote: kytx
        Yes, the javelin operator does not need any special training!

        And the operator of the NLAU is not particularly needed, but very often they hit not from above as they should, but from the side, as from a banal RPG, which means either the nerves are to hell, or they are not aware of the different modes. The operator of MANPADS with external guidance, like the British, then nothing shines at all.
        1. IVZ
          +1
          April 21 2022 10: 15
          Training and some combat experience are always needed. Everyone has nerves. And when, unlike the amers, there is no awareness of the overwhelming superiority of their own aircraft or air supremacy, and the enemy is serious ... Moreover, as I believe, in conditions of poor control, ATGMs are handed out to anyone after a brief briefing.
          1. +1
            April 21 2022 10: 17
            Quote: IVZ
            Moreover, as I believe, in conditions of poor control, ATGMs are handed out to just anyone after a brief briefing.

            Now imagine that this is a MANPADS, and even with the need to track a high-speed target in the sight.
        2. +5
          April 21 2022 11: 41
          Quote: Vladimir_2U
          Quote: kytx
          Yes, the javelin operator does not need any special training!

          And the operator of the NLAU is not particularly needed, but very often they hit not from above as they should, but from the side, as from a banal RPG, which means either the nerves are to hell, or they are not aware of the different modes. The operator of MANPADS with external guidance, like the British, then nothing shines at all.

          It's even easier in NLAW. However...

          here it is necessary to take into account both theoretical and practical training, psychological training (those very nerves) and the conditions of real application.
          No matter how good the theory is, one cannot do without practical launches. With all the simplicity of NLAW, at least a couple of real shots are needed to get used to the "pipe" butt and recoil. No matter what anyone says, there is still a return (impact on the shooter) from the release of a non-weightless rocket, plus a rather noticeable pop of the starter. And if at this moment an unprepared shooter "lost" the line of sight, if he involuntarily lifted the tube up, there will be a miss. And if NLAW, in theory, can be practiced with at least a dozen shots, how many missiles will be issued for training each Javelin operator?

          Psychological preparation. The tank is terrible. Well, when he is his own - then he is almost ready to kiss his armor. But if the tank is enemy, and even quite close (which is typical for urban combat), a few tens of meters, then this is a terrible thing. It rattles with trucks, its tread is felt through the ground. It is quite difficult to explain to yourself that those sitting inside this monster cannot see you. But others can see - on foot or from other armored vehicles. And you "shine" for a few seconds, at any moment you can catch everything - from a bullet and a fragment to the arrival of a tank OFS. An inexperienced fighter will have one desire - to shoot as soon as possible and, without even observing the result, squeeze into some corner.
          And experience is achieved only by one thing - real combat operations. Tank fear, probably, does not completely disappear from anyone, but becomes dull with the advent of real combat experience.

          Application conditions. When the terrain is flat, then on the same NLAW you can select any mode, even a direct hit, even an attack from above, depends on the target. And when shooting from an elevated position (for example, from the window of a high-rise building)? I'm not a great NLAW specialist, but I'll guess. that in this case you can only shoot in the "direct strike" mode
          1. 0
            April 22 2022 09: 18
            And if NLAW, in theory, can be practiced with at least a dozen shots, how many missiles will be issued for training each Javelin operator?

            the javelin has at least two trainers
            - trainer of basic skills (in class)
            - field trainer
      2. +3
        April 21 2022 07: 09
        That's right, the javelin operator does not need special training, he needs steel Faberge.
        1. +11
          April 21 2022 07: 36
          Quote: Artemion3
          That's right, the javelin operator does not need special training, he needs steel Faberge.

          The cornet operator needs Faberge to keep the target during the entire flight of the rocket. And then shoot and run from 2-4 km
          1. +7
            April 21 2022 08: 43
            The Cornet operator can lie 50 meters from the launcher. And it has less preparation time for launch.
            1. +2
              April 21 2022 09: 54
              The Cornet operator can lie 50 meters from the launcher. And it has less preparation time for launch.

              Doubtful assertion. While he sets up the launcher, retires to a safe place, turns on the console and directs the optics, it takes more time than working with the Javelin. The Javelin is more mobile in position, and it doesn't have a revealing laser beam. All operations for pointing the missile at the target are performed by the on-board computer. He sees her and follows her movements. hi
              1. +1
                April 22 2022 10: 12
                The Javelin is more mobile in position, and it doesn't have a revealing laser beam.

                the operator does not immediately take the target into sight, but leads the rocket with a laser a little to the side or higher. in addition, the laser allows you to fire on helicopters at a high angular velocity
                .
                All operations for pointing the missile at the target are performed by the on-board computer. He sees her and follows her movements.

                the latest modifications of the cornet do the same - they set up an automatic target capture and tracking.
                .
                While he sets up the launcher, retires to a safe place, turns on the console and directs the optics, it takes more time than working with the Javelin.

                Well, so you compare the complexes in different weight categories and, most importantly, the cost - only one javelin missile (for yourself) costs like three full cornet complexes (for sale).
                .
                with a javelin, the operator must fire under enemy fire - seeing the target with his eyes, from the cornet, the operator fires lying down, maybe lying down because of a small shelter (roughly - the sight is below, the rocket is above), maybe remotely. the cornet operator can choose a more comfortable firing range - without the possibility of the enemy firing back in range.
                the javelin operator also needs additional time to bring the weapon to battle - to cool the matrix, and this is also a lot - as long as you aim and cool, they can nail
                1. +1
                  14 June 2022 16: 36
                  The American also needs time to capture the target with a homing head. Instantly, the head does not capture the target.
                  Yes, Cornet has a remote control. I watched the video where it was shown. A Russian tablet, also for the military, connected to the complex by cable. This was already a year ago.
                  I also watched about testing a new tank shell. Distance 4 km. Abrams, dragged to Russia from Iraq. Shot in the frontal projection of the tower - exit from behind, it turns out through. They fired from the Armata. They said that it only fits there in length. Penetration due to a particularly hard core made of a new tungsten .... I don’t remember the alloy and, well, a very high projectile speed.
                  You can say anything about me, but I saw it and don't think it's a fake.
            2. 0
              April 22 2022 18: 03
              The Cornet operator can lie 50 meters from the launcher.

              I would like to see photographs to support this assertion.
              Ukrainian "Stugny", indeed, have a remote control, but the Tula KBP "did not master" a similar one on a portable "Cornet", although, most likely, the Ministry of Defense did not impose such requirements
          2. -1
            April 22 2022 12: 42
            Seriously? Where to shoot and where to run?))) The Javelin has a range of 1500 meters in ideal conditions, and not 2-4 km. And if there is no target thermal contrast of 14+ degrees, then there is often a failure of guidance. I'm not saying that as a means against pillboxes and pillboxes, Javelin is simply zero. So shut up and don't phony, you crazy kid. For the amount of Javelin, you can take 10 ATGM Kornet, Stugna, etc. And to have a universal remedy against any threats, which is capable of shooting at 4 km. Israeli Spike MR/NR are good. But this is a 5th generation ATGM with the possibility of correction after a shot and blind shooting.
            1. 0
              April 22 2022 13: 02
              The Javelin has a range of 1500 meters in ideal conditions, not 2-4 km.

              What is this statement based on?
              And if there is no target thermal contrast of 14+ degrees, then there is often a failure of guidance.

              What is this statement based on?
              I'm not saying that as a means against pillboxes and pillboxes, Javelin is simply zero.

              What is this statement based on?
            2. 0
              April 22 2022 16: 07
              Quote: Expert2017
              Seriously? Where to shoot and where to run?))) The Javelin has a range of 1500 meters in ideal conditions, and not 2-4 km. And if there is no target thermal contrast of 14+ degrees, then there is often a failure of guidance. I'm not saying that as a means against pillboxes and pillboxes, Javelin is simply zero. So shut up and don't phony, you crazy kid. For the amount of Javelin, you can take 10 ATGM Kornet, Stugna, etc. And to have a universal remedy against any threats, which is capable of shooting at 4 km. Israeli Spike MR/NR are good. But this is a 5th generation ATGM with the possibility of correction after a shot and blind shooting.

              Quote: Expert2017
              So shut up and don't phony, you crazy kid

              You teach your wife a wise guy. Tell this to our tankers on the front line.
              1. 0
                April 22 2022 22: 50
                It would have been much worse for our tankers on the front line if the Ukrainians had 10 Kornet anti-tank systems instead of one Javelin. So I don't have to poke. And don't talk about tankers. It is impossible to ride on enemy territory in a parade march without reconnaissance. And Javelin has nothing to do with it.
          3. 0
            April 30 2022 16: 28
            And the cornet hits. And the javelin is not very. The Fire/Forget concept turned out to be a promotional wafer. And the most reliable systems now are not laser, not radio command, and even more so, not homing, but good old wires
        2. +4
          April 21 2022 11: 43
          Quote: Artemion3
          That's right, the javelin operator does not need special training, he needs steel Faberge.

          steel feberge are needed by any birdman, grenade launcher and MANPADS shooter. Unless, of course, you don’t shoot like in a shooting range at some garbage that even theoretically cannot answer you.
      3. +5
        April 21 2022 09: 03
        Yes, the javelin operator does not need any special training! Everything is quite simple there.

        I saw a live demonstration of the work from this complex. Everything is really quite simple, even elementary. In what way is it similar to handling from a modern digital camera. The operator must direct the optics to the target, the screen is no different from the screen of a camera or video camera. Then mark the object from the marker, the computer itself monitors its movement. Then confirmation, pressing the button, start and free. The missile will follow the target wherever it moves, without the participation of the operator. Shot and forgot. At the same time, the target will not even understand that it will be burned in a few seconds ... The rocket leaves a barely noticeable smoky trail, which quickly dissipates. It is almost impossible to visually detect a launch. The damaging charge is powerful, it is slightly affected by some kind of mesh cover. Javelin oh. dangerous stuff! hi
        1. The network is full of photos of how the T-72 with torn turrets was destroyed.
          1. +2
            April 21 2022 10: 06
            Indeed, the spectacle is not for the faint of heart. The location of the ammunition load in the hull is the weak point of the 72. The chances of the crew to survive are zero. And besides, the roof is unprotected, the gratings that began to be placed on top are unlikely to be saved. It must be admitted that the T-72 is poorly suited for a war with a well-equipped enemy with modern means of destruction.
            1. +1
              April 21 2022 10: 10
              Quote: pytar
              It must be admitted that the T-72 is poorly suited for a war with a well-equipped enemy with modern means of destruction.

              I used to think that the T-64/72/80 were morally obsolete, now they are already physically outdated. We need to rethink the role of tanks and fundamentally change them technically.
              1. +5
                April 21 2022 10: 22
                We need to rethink the role of tanks and fundamentally change them technically.


                For a long time there has been talk that tanks are obsolete weapons and, they say, they should be completely abandoned. And the Americans do not announce the heir to Abrams.

                The truth, as always, lies in the middle. The tank remains a formidable weapon, but the tactics of use in the 72st century should not copy the Kursk Bulge. And hand-held anti-tank weapons - like the "javelins" mentioned in the article, that the NLAW is an extremely dangerous threat, which again needs to be countered with the help of tactics, and not by welding a "brazier" on the roof of the T-XNUMX. There are references in the article to the obsolescence of tanks destroyed by javelins, but there is no explanation why non-obsolete tanks are better protected from hitting the roof?
                1. -7
                  April 21 2022 10: 47
                  Quote: Proctologist
                  they must be abandoned altogether.

                  The ILC completely abandoned them, strengthening the role of UAVs and missiles. Britain is dramatically reducing the park.

                  Quote: Proctologist
                  And the Americans do not announce the heir to Abrams.

                  The platform has not run out of modernization potential, nothing new is offered in principle.
                  Quote: Proctologist
                  which, again, must be resisted with the help of tactics, and not by welding a "barbecue" on the roof of the T-72.

                  I agree to all 100%.
                  Quote: Proctologist
                  Are non-obsolete tanks better protected from hitting the roof?

                  "Western" tanks have a big plus in the form of a trolley capable of carrying a weight of 80 tons and space for installing additional equipment. They may well bring KAZ to work in the upper hemisphere, just as long as there is no such threat for them. The leading NATO countries have already equipped some of their tanks with conventional KAZ or have signed contracts for this.
                  1. +6
                    April 21 2022 16: 19
                    Quote: OgnennyiKotik
                    "Western" tanks have a big plus in the form of a cart capable of carrying a weight of 80 tons

                    This is some nonsense. The tanks themselves are already overloaded, already on the railway there are problems with the transfer, and the bridges will not hold an 80-ton fool. You write nonsense.
                2. +8
                  April 21 2022 12: 01
                  The truth is that we are now witnessing a "crisis of platforms" in general: a decrease in their resistance to the impact of weapons (primarily guided ones). We see it on land, on water and in the air. Equipment is rapidly turning into scrap metal, carrying away the crews. On different platforms, they try to deal with missile threats in different ways, but as you can see, if there is success, it is not outstanding.
                  If we talk about ground equipment, then it did not begin to realize its vulnerability yesterday. But the problem is precisely in the wide distribution of anti-tank weapons, because the protection of tanks was precisely what was built on the low probability of being hit by an "ordinary person". It was enough to make sure that there were no anti-tank guns / obstacles / mines / other tanks in the direction of impact and go! And now you can expect a catch literally from everywhere, and if the armor is no longer quite "holding", then the "man-tank" shootout has turned into a "man-man" (or, at least, approached one), i.e. chances of defeat goals, if not equal, then converged. And here the principle “first noticed - first shot - first hit” already comes to the fore, and, other things being equal, it is easier for an infantryman to detect and identify a tank than for a tank to single out a tank infantryman dangerous for himself. This is a serious problem. Previously, there was enough protection according to the passive scenario: 1. not the fact that it will shoot (nothing) 2. it’s not the fact that it will hit (the difficulty of shooting, for example, with a “baby” is worthy of fables) 3. it’s not the fact that it will pierce (DZ + combo armor still worth something). Now all these probabilities have grown up and the tanks have become unhappy. In response, they began to gradually adopt ship defense technologies (they also had armor, but "couldn't cope"): yes, we fundamentally pierce the ship with a rocket or torpedo, and if we can no longer do anything about it, then it remains only to actively prevent them from getting into frame.
                  The problem is that there is only enough space for a compromise means - KAZ, which sees and attacks targets in limited angles / speed ranges / minimum ranges from the tank, is weakly effective against BOPS, may be unsafe for the tank itself / environment, roads, not reliable and etc. Of course, this is better than nothing (no matter what anyone says), but it does not bring any optimal contribution from all sides to the protection of armored vehicles (apparently, therefore, it is not widely distributed).
                  KAZ is developing and perhaps someday it will leave its shortcomings on its own, but another "naval" concept could speed up this process or even make it optional. The fact is that trying to protect each tank personally is perhaps not the best idea in modern realities. The fleet has long been thinking in terms of ship orders, where everyone specializes in some function, and the performance characteristics and payload of each ship are selected for it. And if in +/-50 tons it is not possible to enter protection for everyone, then it will be possible to allocate a separate board that would deal only with this? In fact, this is also air defense with specific goals: yes, you need the highest reaction speed and targeting accuracy, but visibility for many kilometers is not so important ... Moreover, it is important that the system triggers precisely on things that are potentially dangerous for the tank’s armor, and not on everything passing by like AGS-s or riflemen.
                  In my understanding, sooner or later they will come to this. Torahs appeared as "umbrellas" against missiles from the air, now something is needed from missiles from the ground. And the "tanks" may "feel better" or evolve towards self-propelled guns, and the descendants of what is now called the BMPT will come to the very front.
                  1. +2
                    April 21 2022 12: 22
                    I agree. There is a division into 2 branches:
                    1. Heavy assault self-propelled guns. 152/155 mm gun, reinforced armor, passive and active protection systems. In principle, Western MBTs have already transformed into heavy tanks and are moving in this direction.
                    2. BMPT brought to mind with autocannons, missiles working on armored vehicles and air targets, radar and ECO. Such a machine will be able to provide air defense of the near zone, the destruction of tank-dangerous targets, and itself hit enemy armored vehicles. In the wars that we are now waging, there are 2 main dangers of UAVs and ATGMs. In the USA, the following are moving in the creation of such machines:

                    1. +4
                      April 21 2022 13: 05
                      Western MBTs are not going anywhere, both figuratively (they do not change their capabilities qualitatively, but only try to keep up with progress), and literally - 70 ton carcasses is not an indicator of quality, it is inertia of thinking and wars show that this also does not guarantee safety (like ours, for example, a slightly better power / mass indicator, it’s another matter that at the same time there is at least some mobility and cross-country ability, and the rocket catches up in the same way), but “going” interferes. The fact that every 5-10 years a few mm of frontal armor or hp are built up in the tank. engine and call it a NEW TANK, as if hinting that "there are no methods against Kostya Saprykin."
                      The BMPT will not deal with air defense functions (both in terms of UAVs and protection against missiles), because this requires a lot of special radar junk (which will be shaved off in the very first battle, like other hanging crap in containers), places for which it cannot be in BMPT. And she will deal with her tasks, and she will hit enemy equipment up to the tank with the fire of the main gun (or try to do it) or by calling support in the form of a conventional tank / UAV / helicopter / IS / artillery fire with a corrected projectile from the depth, etc.
                      The specific function of destroying ATGMs will also require a specific design (most likely, it will not be very similar to a conventional anti-aircraft gun: for example, two towers along the edges of the hull, each monitoring its own hemisphere), which is unlikely to be combined with anything else, or it will be "neither this or that." Proximity to the front line and own tanks will require a tank base and an appropriate level of protection.
                      1. 0
                        April 21 2022 13: 22
                        The term BMPT is misleading. What is done in the Russian Federation under this name is an incomprehensible craft.
                        Quote: CouchExpert
                        air defense functions (both in terms of UAVs and protection against missiles)

                        Therefore, I brought the M1 AGDS and IM-SHORAD projects, this is approximately what is needed for the indicated purposes.
                        Quote: CouchExpert
                        there can be no place for which in the BMPT. And she will deal with her tasks, and she will deal with enemy equipment up to the tank

                        This requires a heavy infantry fighting vehicle. Naturally, an appropriate layout is needed.
                        Israel has this option:

                        We could have one.



                        Thus, we are talking about 3 cars:
                        1. Assault self-propelled guns
                        2. Heavy BMP
                        3. Development of "M1 AGDS and IM-SHORAD". Air defense of the near zone + reconnaissance.
                      2. +1
                        April 21 2022 14: 03
                        Quote: OgnennyiKotik
                        Thus, we are talking about 3 cars:
                        1. Assault self-propelled guns

                        You can completely leave modern MBTs without any revolutionary changes. If the function of protection against ATGMs can be implemented, then the design can be revised towards both strengthening protection against other fire weapons (mines, fire on board), and towards increasing the internal volumes for armament.
                        Quote: OgnennyiKotik
                        2. Heavy BMP

                        A heavy infantry fighting vehicle is a very attractive thing, again with its "imaginary versatility" like protection, and support, and landing, and some kind of anti-tank missiles ... But in fact, only the first two functions are really required of it, if you develop which we get to throw out the rest ... BMPT. Putting it all together just doesn't work. Watch Pentagon Wars.
                        Quote: OgnennyiKotik
                        3. Development of "M1 AGDS and IM-SHORAD". Air defense of the near zone + reconnaissance.

                        If it is possible to implement protection against ATGMs and air defense in a broad sense in one building (which I personally doubt), then there will really be 3 vehicles. If not, then air defense on a light base will remain as it is, and the "unknown little animal" will go with tanks and BMPT to open the cutting edge.
              2. +5
                April 21 2022 12: 12
                hi
                I used to think that the T-64/72/80 were morally obsolete, now they are already physically outdated.

                IMHO, since 1973 it should have been clear that something had to be done with such an arrangement. But no, let's get more armor and a different gun. And we'll shove the rocket into the cannon.

                We need to rethink the role of tanks and fundamentally change them technically.

                As for "rethinking" it will be a hundred years yet.
                According to the IMHO technique, there are already obvious things, at least:
                1. BC must be protected. Even on VO they write about this "leave BC only in AZ". No fast-burning shells and ammo without protection.
                2. Again there is a photo of tanks WITHOUT INSTALLED DZ PROTECTION. Either they "didn't have time", or they "didn't deliver".
                3. We need KAZ, already yesterday and all-perspective. Without it, the tank is defenseless.
                4. Fuel must not be with the crew.
                5. There should be "electronic support" from the navigator to the combat control system.
                6. It is possible that a "narrow and dry tower" is needed.

                In short, whatever one may say, it turns out Merkava. My hands are already itching to write an article about her, but somehow they are itching so far. Offered to the Israelis on the forum - they refuse. They are more interested in other topics.
                1. -3
                  April 21 2022 13: 29
                  Quote: Wildcat
                  In short, whatever one may say, it turns out Merkava. My hands are already itching to write an article about her, but somehow they are itching so far. Offered to the Israelis on the forum - they refuse. They are more interested in other topics.

                  For that matter, armata is a more suitable option. The only problem is that it cannot be pulled financially and technically. And huge problems in its mass production.
                  1. +2
                    April 21 2022 14: 49
                    There are no problems, except for those who have a full name and position.
                    The industry can (and IMHO wants) to upgrade the T72, T80 and T90 for the th time.
                    You can make a new tank, but why? If it is even possible to drive tanks of "ancient" variants into the NWO? See what variants of the same T72 are fixed in losses by the same Oryx.

                    A good question is how good is an uninhabited tower for MBT and a crew of 3 with a limited view of the "eyes".
                2. -2
                  April 21 2022 14: 25
                  Quote: Wildcat
                  1. BC must be protected.

                  And how to protect it with such a large occupied volume? On Soviet tanks, unlike Western ones, the BC is located in the most protected place - on the BO floor. In Abrams and Leopard, part of the BC is located above (!) The hull - in the tower, protected from all sides by armor no more than 70 mm. Those. both leo and abrams can be hit in BC both from above and from the side / rear. And all this inevitable "evil" associated with unitary shots for a 120mm cannon.
                  1. +1
                    April 21 2022 14: 45
                    On Soviet tanks, unlike Western ones, the BC is located in the most protected place - on the BO floor.

                    OMG
                    Look at the layout of the BC in T72, or something ...
                    PS Your comment is the most illiterate in two months, congratulations!
                    1. -1
                      April 21 2022 17: 12
                      Quote: Wildcat
                      Look at the layout of the BC in T72, or something ...

                      Looked ... and what?
                      Quote: Wildcat
                      PS Your comment is the most illiterate in two months, congratulations!

                      You are not Santa Claus, and the New Year has long passed. Is there really anything to write about? I repeat the question: How to protect it with such a large occupied volume?
                      1. +1
                        April 21 2022 18: 10
                        1. "Looked ... so what?" - look as many times as you need to understand where the BC is outside the AZ.

                        2. "I repeat the question: How to protect it with such a large occupied volume?" like the Israelis in the Merkava, fireproof containers.
                      2. -2
                        April 21 2022 20: 50
                        Quote: Wildcat
                        look as many times as needed to figure out where BC is outside of AZ.

                        Once again - looked and what? Further, my advice to you: look with which BC they go into battle on a tank today. I'm sure you'll be surprised. Tactics matter.
                        Quote: Wildcat
                        like the Israelis in the Merkava, fireproof containers.

                        Those. Do you think that the constructive decision of the Americans during WWII is the panacea? Are you five years old?
                  2. -2
                    April 22 2022 20: 15
                    Quote: DesToeR
                    part of the BC is located above (!) The hull - in the tower, protected on all sides by armor no more than 70 mm.

                    As planned. In the event of an explosion, the shock wave goes beyond the habitable volume
              3. +1
                April 21 2022 12: 21
                I used to think that the T-64/72/80 were morally obsolete, now they are already physically outdated. We need to rethink the role of tanks and fundamentally change them technically.

                I like the concept of the Israeli "Merkava"! This tank can be hit, but in most cases the crew stays alive. People are more valuable! I see the further development of tanks as a reduction in weight due to booking optimization, unmanned robotic systems based on artificial intelligence, hybrid control systems, active protection, new camouflage technologies, networking, etc. Of course we need to change our tactics! hi
                1. 0
                  April 21 2022 13: 31
                  Quote: pytar
                  unmanned robotic systems

                  And all equipment should be designed optionally unmanned. Now it is not expensive, depending on the tasks, use the crew or keep it away from the equipment.
                2. +2
                  April 21 2022 13: 35
                  Quote: pytar
                  I like the concept of the Israeli "Merkava"! This tank can be hit, but in most cases the crew stays alive.

                  this is a common tale. Or did you count the power unit for armor?
                  And if the "roofbreaker" arrives, how will the "Merkava" feel?
                  This tank pulls for only one reason - it has a KAZ. But this in no way relates to the problem of survival in the affected tank. If they hit, then KAZ did not help.
                  Yes, Western tanks do not throw off towers, not only because the BC is located differently, but also because their tower is much heavier. How much does the "cap" of "Abrams" weigh? Nearly 40 tons

                  Quote: pytar
                  I see further development of tanks as a decrease in mass due to booking optimization

                  this is the same thing that is implemented on Soviet / Russian tanks. But then what about the Merkava?

                  Quote: pytar
                  systems based on artificial intelligence, hybrid control systems, active protection, new camouflage technologies, networking, etc. Of course we need to change our tactics!

                  this is all necessary for the "crew" tanks, all this will allow them to be taken to a new level.
                  1. -1
                    April 21 2022 15: 01
                    Statisticians say about the high level of survival of the crew of the Merkava. Israelis are very sensitive to losses. The tank itself, designed with an eye to the maximum protection of the crew, this has its share and the engine compartment with the transmission in front. The center of gravity is shifted forward, because of that there is a limitation on the mass of the front armor, but they also made it at the most acute angle. The logic of the designers is clear - the tank can still be hit in the front, but at the same time, the engine compartment will increase the crew's chances of staying alive. The tank will be put out of action, and people will be saved thanks to a convenient and relatively safe exit from the stern. The turret is designed in such a way that it gives some protection over the hull like an umbrella. As for the ammunition, the Merkava has them in special protective individual containers. This slows down the infection process somewhat, but reduces the threat from the explosion. Therefore, the Israeli designers refused to use the automatic loader. The tank turned out to be maximally protected, but too heavy, which is not a problem, for the grounds of the Teren of Israel. How can weight be reduced? An integrated approach is the introduction of new materials, the transition to robotic unmanned combat vehicles, etc. next generation technologies.
                    1. 0
                      April 21 2022 17: 18
                      Quote: pytar
                      statisticians say.

                      People write statistics. And how the Israelis write it, we know - about the same as the Germans during WWII, the Americans at all times and our galloping enemies now.

                      "Merkava" is an excellent example of how tanks should not be designed. And the root cause, from which all the shortcomings of the tank - from its front-engine layout. As a result, we got a huge shed, relatively weak armored (even in frontal projection). What saves the tank is the presence of KAZ and competent tactics of use.

                      Why MTOs are placed in the nose on infantry fighting vehicles and armored personnel carriers is still clear - to ensure dismounting and landing from the stern. This is a forced decision, the Israelis themselves, of their own free will, went for this, and on a tank, where there is no need for this at all.

                      Py Sy To reduce the mass of a tank with an adequate level of armor, among other things, by reducing the armor volume. On the "Merkava" it seemed to be deliberately inflated.
                      1. 0
                        April 21 2022 17: 39
                        People write statistics. And how the Israelis write it, we know...

                        I guess you personally "100% more accurate information", tsakhal nervously smokes on the sidelines ... lol
                        "Merkava" is an excellent example of how tanks should not be designed.

                        Israeli designers clearly have an opinion different from yours. Having tested the "Merkava" in battles, we decided to continue along the same path. Recently, there was an article on the VO about the concept of the future Israeli tank.
                      2. 0
                        April 22 2022 09: 12
                        The Merkava Witness Sect is almost the same as the Saint Javelin Worship Sect and Bayraktor's Witnesses. These are those who heard the ringing somewhere, but due to the scarcity of technical and other knowledge and the complete absence of thinking, they do not understand anything and are forced to focus on someone's "expert" opinion. And it is really useless to explain something to these people - the Scripture about Merkava for them is the same as the Holy Scripture for a believer.
                      3. 0
                        April 22 2022 11: 37
                        the funniest laughing Sect those who grumble about:
                        The Merkava Witness Sect is almost the same as the Saint Javelin Worship Sect and Bayraktor's Witnesses.
                3. +2
                  April 21 2022 14: 31
                  Quote: pytar
                  I like the concept of the Israeli "Merkava"!

                  How? In the forehead, modern tanks do not suffer from ATGMs - there is the most powerful armor, but the dvigun can stall. Armata in this regard will be more interesting, because. the crew is separated from the projectiles on one side and is protected by the tank's most powerful armor on the other side.
                  Quote: pytar
                  This tank can be hit, but in most cases the crew stays alive.

                  The BC in the Merkava is located, as in Soviet tanks, in the hull at the back, i.e. their security is no different from the "drum" in the T-72.
                  1. +1
                    April 21 2022 15: 01
                    The BC in the Merkava is located, as in Soviet tanks, in the hull at the back, i.e. their security is no different from the "drum" in the T-72.

                    Well, what can I say? "Happiness in ignorance."
                    1. 0
                      April 21 2022 17: 09
                      Quote: Wildcat
                      Well, what can I say? "Happiness in ignorance."

                      And what is wrong? BC in the Merkava is placed in the aft part of the tank hull, part of the ammunition is located on the floor of the BO. The question arises: what is the difficulty of hitting this BC with the help of Javelins and NLAW through the roof of the hull / turret or from an RPG into the side? "Happiness" it is - everyone has their own.
                      1. 0
                        April 22 2022 01: 55
                        "with the help of Javelin and NLAW through the roof of the hull / turret or from the RPG to the side" ///
                        ----
                        Tower roof protected by 150mm hinged
                        metal-ceramic panels. Boards and feed - too. RPG Merkava is guaranteed not to penetrate. Large ATGMs - can 50/50.
                        In addition, KAZ Trophy shoots down grenades and rockets.
                        The problem is only OBPS.
                  2. +1
                    April 21 2022 17: 48
                    The advantage of the front location of the MTO is that the crew can quickly and relatively safely leave the affected vehicle hiding behind the hulls. With Armata, this will be problematic. For all 3 crew members, 2 hatches are provided on the upper front of the hull. The third to the bottom, it is not always possible to use it.
                    1. 0
                      April 21 2022 20: 47
                      Quote: pytar
                      The advantage of the front location of the MTO is that the crew can quickly and relatively safely leave the affected vehicle hiding behind the hulls.

                      Those. the advantage of having an additional escape route through the passage in the stern? But what about the fact that if the tank is hit in the forehead, the MTU will be guaranteed to be disabled?
                      Quote: pytar
                      With Armata, this will be problematic.

                      There is a probability of defeat, and there is a probability of failure in case of defeat. The Merkava layout has one significant drawback: it is impossible to radically increase the frontal protection of the tank, because. the heaviest units (MTU, front plate of the hull and forehead of the turret) are located in front of the tank.
                      1. 0
                        April 21 2022 21: 25
                        But what about the fact that if the tank is hit in the forehead, the MTU will be guaranteed to be disabled?

                        And what is the point of a tank with a dead crew, whose MTU is intact?
                        The Merkava layout has one significant drawback: it is impossible to radically increase the frontal protection of the tank, because. the heaviest units (MTU, front plate of the hull and forehead of the turret) are located in front of the tank.

                        First clarification: In Merkava, the mass is partially redistributed due to the weight of the tower, which is shifted back.
                        Second: For tanks, it is no longer possible to increase the defense by increasing the weight of the armor. In addition, all-aspect protection is already needed, it cannot be increased at all by thickening the armor. Therefore, fundamentally new solutions and lineups are needed.
                      2. 0
                        April 21 2022 22: 11
                        Quote: pytar
                        And what is the point of a tank with a dead crew, whose MTU is intact?

                        The defeat in the forehead of the T-72 tank does not always lead to the death of the tank or crew. The tank can leave the battlefield under its own power. Merkava is definitely an irretrievable loss.

                        Quote: pytar
                        First clarification: In Merkava, the mass is partially redistributed due to the weight of the tower, which is shifted back.

                        The turret of the Merkava tank is located in the center of the tank, only the stern part of it is shifted back. The sides and stern are armored significantly less than the forehead, and there is also such a heavy thing as a cannon in front.
                        Quote: pytar
                        Therefore, fundamentally new solutions and lineups are needed.

                        The answer is the layout of the Almaty. The turret is in the center of the tank - its mass is evenly distributed on the supporting surface, the MTO is behind and compensates for the weight of the frontal armor. The crew is completely separated from ammunition and fuel / oil.
                      3. -3
                        April 22 2022 11: 30
                        The defeat in the forehead of the T-72 tank does not always lead to the death of the tank or crew. The tank can leave the battlefield under its own power.

                        Head-on collisions are characteristic of the wars of the "last century". For such wars, tanks such as the T-72 were made. In modern battles go all-angle battle. Saturation of space with a variety of anti-tank weapons raises the question of a fundamental change in the design of armored vehicles.
                        Merkava is definitely an irretrievable loss.

                        The irretrievable loss of equipment is less evil than the irretrievable loss of the crew.
                        The turret of the Merkava tank is located in the center of the tank, only the stern part of it is shifted back. The sides and stern are armored significantly less than the forehead, and there is also such a heavy thing as a cannon in front.

                        Merkava is far from perfect, but it has fundamentally successful solutions that take place in the tanks of the future.
                        The answer is the layout of the Almaty. ...

                        The crew has difficulty exiting in an emergency. An unmanned turret requires good, working electronics. And the Russian Federation has problems with electronics ...
                      4. 0
                        April 22 2022 14: 03
                        Quote: pytar
                        In modern battles go all-angle battle.

                        The theory of "all-aspect" combat has been around for a good hundred years (see the chapter "Fight in the environment").
                        Quote: pytar
                        Saturation of space with a variety of anti-tank weapons raises the question of a fundamental change in the design of armored vehicles.

                        It was the high saturation of modern PTS that necessitated the transition to differentiated booking. The T-34 and KV-1 tanks of the 30s of the last century had equivalent circular armor protection. They refused it, and deliberately.
                        Quote: pytar
                        The irretrievable loss of equipment is less evil than the irretrievable loss of the crew.

                        The irretrievable loss of equipment in battle will inevitably lead to a "drawdown" in the available fire weapons. As a result, this will cause additional losses, if not in the tank crew, then at least in the infantry. Nothing is free.

                        Quote: pytar
                        Merkava is far from perfect, but it has fundamentally successful solutions that take place in the tanks of the future.

                        The only successful solution in the Merkava tank today is Trophy. Everything else is not used by anyone in the world. Neither Leclerc (France) nor Black Panther (South Korea) uses such a lineup of units. Moreover, this lineup is difficult to find in mass tanks for the entire foreseeable period of their development. Unique. I'm not sure, but weren't the Israelis originally designed the BMP?
                        Quote: pytar
                        And the Russian Federation has problems with electronics ...

                        Why do you think so? There is electronics to launch devices into space, but working on earth ... so bad.
                      5. +2
                        April 22 2022 14: 22
                        The theory of "all-aspect" combat has been around for a good hundred years (see the chapter "Fight in the environment").

                        This is called confusing warm with soft.
                        What does "surrounded combat" have to do with "all-angle combat"?
                        The concept of the second appeared with the introduction of electronics, when guided missiles became possible. Vseperekursnost - this is the absence of dependence of the result of the use of weapons on the angle of the target.
                        The irretrievable loss of equipment in battle will inevitably lead to a "drawdown" in the available fire weapons. As a result, this will cause additional losses, if not in the tank crew, then at least in the infantry.

                        Again warm with soft.
                        And the irretrievable loss of the crew, in addition to the irretrievable loss of equipment, does not lead to a drawdown? It drives exactly the same.
                        Why do you think so? There is electronics to launch devices into space, but working on earth ... so bad.

                        And again warm with soft.
                        Apparatuses were launched into space on electronics half a century ago. So that's the argument.
                      6. +1
                        April 22 2022 17: 11
                        Quote: Nefarious skeptic
                        This is called confusing warm with soft.

                        Gentlemen "experts", I ask simple questions, but I get verbiage in response:
                        1) why does the LAYOUT of the Merkava tank give an advantage over the classic layout? Ammunition, crew are in the same places as in all other tanks.
                        2) why are you considering the option of the immediate death of the tank if the frontal armor is damaged in the classic layout and ignore the transformation of the Merkava tank into a bunker. Why is the option not being considered when the tank is hit, but has not lost its mobility and ANOTHER (surviving) crew member of the T-72 / Abrams / Leopard tank can take the wrecked vehicle off the battlefield under its own power.
                        3) why do you ignore that the "miraculous" characteristics of the Merkava in terms of security were "bought" not for free, but by increasing the mass to 70 tons already EMNIP ?! Do you think that the weight of the tank and the doctrine of the use of BTT "is different"?
                        PS If Israel considers the characteristics of the Merkava to be satisfactory in accordance with the adopted OWN doctrine of the use of tanks, then why did you get the idea that this doctrine is acceptable for the RF Armed Forces? It is necessary to dance from the stove, i.e. from the military and their views on the role and place of the tank in the army.
                      7. -2
                        April 22 2022 17: 27
                        Comrade "expert".
                        I pointed out to you specific dubious or incorrect theses of your commentary. What does what you wrote now have to do with my comment to you?
                        Or did you also want to discuss the Israeli tank with me?
                      8. -1
                        April 22 2022 21: 57
                        Quote: Nefarious skeptic
                        I pointed out to you specific dubious or incorrect theses of your commentary.

                        Your theses are at least controversial, especially about the all-angle battle. But what about the aviation that has been waging this very battle since the 60s of the last century? Maybe not only life-giving armor, but also tactics and even strategy can increase the survivability of the machine? No ... do you need 150 mm in a circle? Plus, they do not answer any of the theses in my commentary. To which you have bothered to write your own.
                        Quote: Nefarious skeptic
                        Or did you also want to discuss the Israeli tank with me?

                        No, I wrote my comment to another person.
                      9. 0
                        April 25 2022 09: 21
                        Your theses are at least controversial, especially about the all-angle battle. But what about the aviation that has been waging this very battle since the 60s of the last century?

                        And aviation only confirms what I said
                        Vseperekursnost - this is the absence of dependence of the result of the use of weapons on the angle of the target.

                        Since then the question arose of eliminating the restrictions imposed on the use of missiles, depending on the oncoming or overtaking courses.
                        Maybe not only life-giving armor, but also tactics and even strategy can increase the survivability of the machine? No ... do you need 150 mm in a circle?

                        And neither I nor your opponent even hinted at an increase in the thickness of the armor.
                        Changing the layout or using KAZ is this equivalent to "150 mm in a circle" in your understanding?
                        Plus, they do not answer any of the theses in my commentary.

                        Theses are not questions, but statements. See for yourself by looking at the passages I quoted from your message. Are you suggesting responding to... assertions?
                      10. -2
                        April 22 2022 18: 16
                        Quote: DesToeR
                        If Israel considers the characteristics of the Merkava to be satisfactory in accordance with the adopted OWN doctrine of the use of tanks, then why did you get the idea that this doctrine is acceptable for the RF Armed Forces? You have to dance from the stove,

                        It is necessary to dance from losses.
                      11. 0
                        April 22 2022 22: 02
                        Quote: Pilat2009
                        It is necessary to dance from losses.

                        Yes? I heard that the Panzerwaffe suffered significantly fewer losses than the BTT of the Red Army during Operation Citadel. Are you sure that losses, and not the fulfillment of the task, are the very indisputable measure of the success of a piece of equipment?
                      12. -2
                        April 30 2022 13: 41
                        Quote: DesToeR
                        I heard that the Panzerwaffe suffered significantly fewer losses than the BTT of the Red Army during Operation Citadel. Are you sure that the loss, not the completion of the task

                        This explains that the USSR lost 11 million and Germany 5 million military personnel
                      13. 0
                        April 30 2022 21: 18
                        Quote: Pilat2009
                        This explains that the USSR lost 11 million and Germany 5 million military personnel

                        By the way, this also explains why the Third Reich lost its entire country, but the USSR did not. Someone "checkers", and someone "go". I prefer to "go" in matters of life and death. You, apparently, are more important than "checkers".
                      14. -1
                        1 May 2022 18: 36
                        Quote: DesToeR
                        why the Third Reich lost its entire country, but the USSR did not.

                        Here you can argue why Germany lost. I don’t think that the USSR would have won if the United States supplied Lend Lease to the Germans
                      15. 0
                        April 30 2022 23: 37
                        Regarding the losses of the Third Reich in 5 million (!) go here: https://topwar.ru/11444-poteri-sssr-i-germanii-v-vov.html. And we are enlightened. Yes, yes, German generals also lie, especially if their "memoirs" were written after WWII.
                      16. 0
                        1 May 2022 18: 33
                        Quote: DesToeR
                        Regarding the losses of the Third Reich in 5 million (!) go here: https://topwar.ru/11444-poteri-sssr-i-germanii-v-vov.html. And we are enlightened. Yes, yes, German generals also lie, especially if their "memoirs" were written after WWII.

                        Losses are not counted on the basis of memoirs.
                      17. -1
                        April 22 2022 15: 59
                        Timur answered you. He's right, you're confusing things.
                      18. +1
                        April 22 2022 01: 57
                        "one significant drawback: it is impossible to radically increase the frontal protection of the tank" ///
                        ---
                        It's right. The forehead of the Merkava corps is generally significantly weaker than that of Abrams.
                      19. -1
                        April 22 2022 11: 33
                        It's right. The forehead of the Merkava corps is generally significantly weaker than that of Abrams.

                        But on the other hand, the Merkova crew as a whole is better protected and has more chances to get out with the car and stay alive than the Abrams crew. People are more valuable, technology can rivet a lot.
                4. +2
                  April 21 2022 22: 36
                  The Merkava-4 is better protected than other tanks
                  tower roof. Above the main, rather thin
                  (like all other tanks) steel armor
                  metal-ceramic plates attached
                  15 cm thick.
                  It is difficult to say whether they will withstand tandem
                  Warhead Javelina.. what
                  But the NLAW will be saved from the blow.
                  Although a complete solution to the problem would be
                  installation of the 5th radar and the 3rd KAZ "shooter"
                  Trophy for the tank.
            2. +1
              April 21 2022 13: 09
              For a war with a well-equipped and trained enemy, everything is ill-suited. Any tank will be knocked out, just a little less often or a little more often.
          2. 0
            April 21 2022 10: 06
            No one is arguing about this. This is a good complex. But there will always be a confrontation between the shield and the sword. Under some conditions, the sword wins, under some conditions, the shield.
          3. 0
            April 21 2022 11: 44
            Quote: Oorfene Juice and his Wooden Soldiers
            T-72 with detached turrets

            even more such photos from the T-64. Did they burn them with Javelins too?
            1. +1
              April 21 2022 22: 39
              90% of the broken tanks in the pictures are T-72s.
              And single T-64, T-80 and T-90.
              But dozens of T-64s were captured as trophies,
              abandoned without fuel or shells.
              1. 0
                April 22 2022 01: 42
                lol watch ukroTV and BBC less.
                This is Russia all over the world looking for old armored vehicles, and not ukrovermacht requires "more tanks" from its owners
          4. 0
            April 30 2022 16: 32
            the net is full of pics
            it's okay, I recently watched a movie, there is garbage with three heads flying across the sky and fire from the nostrils ... laughing
    2. The comment was deleted.
      1. +3
        April 21 2022 09: 41
        Quote: OgnennyiKotik
        During this war, we lost (photo / video evidence) 525 tanks

        Those. there, a piece of the back of any tank will be shown and considered proof that this is a Russian tank. It's the same with aviation. This site is complete nonsense.
        Anyone before the Americans recognize at least a tenfold difference in losses between ours and the ukrovermacht, it turns out, according to this site, did the APUs lose 5000 tanks?
        Do not respect yourself, trust this site!
        1. -2
          April 21 2022 13: 14
          Quote: Vladimir_2U
          Quote: OgnennyiKotik
          During this war, we lost (photo / video evidence) 525 tanks

          Those. there, a piece of the back of any tank will be shown and considered proof that this is a Russian tank. It's the same with aviation. This site is complete nonsense.
          Anyone before the Americans recognize at least a tenfold difference in losses between ours and the ukrovermacht, it turns out, according to this site, did the APUs lose 5000 tanks?
          Do not respect yourself, trust this site!

          And who recognizes a 10-fold difference, don’t share? The losses of the enemy can be estimated approximately. Or count the corpses. In any case, the Armed Forces of Ukraine should have ended by now, following the logic of the Moscow Region.
          1. -2
            April 21 2022 16: 14
            Quote: Pilat2009
            And who recognizes a 10-fold difference, do not share?

            I'm sorry, 1 to 6
            The Russians launched the operation with a one-to-three advantage, or one-to-four on the Ukrainian side. But nevertheless, the losses for the last week show 1 to 6 in favor of the Russians.

            https://rus-loh.livejournal.com/916423.html?ysclid=l290jeyskx
            Sorry, not 5 thousand. ukrotankov and 3 thousand.

            Quote: Pilat2009
            In any case, the Armed Forces of Ukraine should have already ended, following the logic of the Moscow Region.
            You do not confuse your own logic with normal. MO indicates about 1500 ukrotanks, and there were up to 3000 of them at the beginning of the SpO.
            1. -1
              April 22 2022 18: 27
              Quote: Vladimir_2U
              MO indicates about 1500 ukrotanks

              MO can show anything. I don’t believe him from the word at all
              1. +1
                April 24 2022 10: 10
                You can trust the unworthy European media and ukrosites. And the Ukrainian MO. They will tell you everything there. Honestly, honestly. :)))
      2. -3
        April 21 2022 10: 54
        During this war, we lost (photo / video evidence) 525 tanks, of which 275 were knocked out, 250 were left by the crew for technical reasons. Armored personnel carriers/infantry fighting vehicles destroyed - 547 pieces, thrown - 456 pieces.

        And again you are broadcasting Ukrainian propaganda, however, you should not have expected anything else.))))
        Ukraine is looking around the world for armored vehicles to compensate for its losses, which are confirmed by data from the Russian Ministry of Defense.
        If the Russian Federation lost 525 tanks in Ukraine, how are you lying here, then it would have gutted all its warehouses and tank units to compensate for these losses. But this is not even close, otherwise the howl of the liberal media would already be standing, you can’t hide this.
        So lies and OgnennyiKotik are now synonymous words in VO.
      3. -1
        April 21 2022 12: 15
        This is only the first two months of NWO.
      4. -5
        April 21 2022 12: 15
        complete rubbish, they should be banned
        1. +1
          April 24 2022 10: 12
          The problem is that they get out of the ban and continue to drag Ukrainian propaganda to the site. Until the next ban.
  3. The comment was deleted.
    1. The comment was deleted.
      1. The comment was deleted.
  4. -3
    April 21 2022 05: 19
    A good thing, it would be nice to work out the issue of a reusable system like the steps of Elon Musk wink
    1. +3
      April 21 2022 07: 13
      Quote: RaptorF22А2
      it would be nice to work out the issue of a reusable system as the steps of Elon Musk

      Exactly! I missed ... I returned back to the "owner" ... only if the evil one returns; and the "owner", with joy that he got rid of the "javelin", already drank and ate, leaving him nothing ... then I don’t know what will be! request
  5. kig
    +4
    April 21 2022 05: 34
    I think - I'm even sure - that thorough statistics and analysis are being conducted in the troops. I am also sure that we will not know the results of the analysis very soon. In the meantime - like this, reflections
    1. +1
      April 21 2022 09: 21
      Quote: kig
      I am also sure that we will not know the results of the analysis very soon.

      well why. we see the results of the analysis directly in real time by the appearance of the tanks of the LPR and DPR. no visors or other ersatz protections against "terrible javilins". this suggests that those who are fighting at the forefront consider this threat (defeat in the upper hemisphere) as secondary, not significant and extremely unlikely.
      Looks like the javelin adept sect is in trouble. request like the bayraktar sect :waat: victims of marketing wink
      1. -5
        April 21 2022 09: 57
        Quote: SanichSan
        no visors and other ersatz protections from "terrible javilins".

        It is explained simply. This protection is useless and even harmful. It was implemented and the army of the Russian Federation is limited, only in the units of the Southern Military District.
  6. +2
    April 21 2022 05: 44
    Well, screams about a child prodigy are a characteristic diagnosis for all sectarians, especially for fascists.
    PC: watch how they immediately flared up and itched on the branch - oh-vey, the author denies that one jabelin kills 8 tanks and two litaks! laughing
    1. -1
      April 21 2022 08: 37
      Petrel, Poseidon, avant-garde also belong here?
      1. -1
        April 21 2022 09: 24
        Quote: GRIGORIY76
        Petrel, Poseidon, avant-garde also belong here?

        do they apply? seems not yet. and javelins with bayraktars are used and they didn’t demonstrate anything outstanding request
        1. -3
          April 21 2022 10: 13
          Quote: SanichSan
          Quote: GRIGORIY76
          Petrel, Poseidon, avant-garde also belong here?

          do they apply? seems not yet. and javelins with bayraktars are used and they didn’t demonstrate anything outstanding request

          Where does such an analysis come from? If the media talk about 300 used missiles, and 500 tanks were lost, then of course they didn’t demonstrate anything. Keep believing Konashenkov
          1. +3
            April 21 2022 11: 48
            Quote: Pilat2009
            The media talk about 300 missiles used, and 500 tanks lost

            do you have official statistics on losses in equipment? I must have missed something, I've never heard of it. Share (do not offer the source of the General Staff of the Armed Forces of Ukraine)?
            1. -4
              April 21 2022 13: 07
              Quote from Tomcat_Tomcat
              Quote: Pilat2009
              The media talk about 300 missiles used, and 500 tanks lost

              do you have official statistics on losses in equipment? I must have missed something, I've never heard of it. Share (do not offer the source of the General Staff of the Armed Forces of Ukraine)?

              No one will announce official losses to you. Above, the site is offered with documented cars
              1. +4
                April 21 2022 13: 28
                Quote: Pilat2009
                Above won site offer

                yet another propaganda.
              2. +2
                April 21 2022 16: 24
                Quote: Pilat2009
                Above, the site is offered with documented cars

                Documented by whom? The photo on which there is doubt is automatically recorded as the loss of a Russian tank. But in Ukrainian losses they write only those from which it is impossible to get away.
          2. -2
            April 21 2022 12: 19
            hundreds of javelins were captured by the DPR
      2. -4
        April 21 2022 09: 37
        S-300/400/500, Topol-M, electronic warfare, Pantsir, Armata, Su-57... No, what are you talking about? "It's different." You need to understand these things!
  7. +4
    April 21 2022 05: 56
    The complex is very heavy and overall, which greatly reduces the ability to maneuver with it.
    In my opinion, the Ukrainian ATGM "Korsar" showed great efficiency, with its remote control capability
    1. +6
      April 21 2022 06: 53
      Quote: svp67
      In my opinion, the Ukrainian ATGM "Korsar" showed great efficiency, with its remote control capability

      Remote control is equipped with ATGM "Stugna-P" ...! As far as I know, the "Corsair" has no such thing! Yes, and they were going to use it initially from the shoulder or relying on the parapet of the trench ... only later, at the insistence of the military, they gave him a "tripod"! This ATGM is considered light; caliber = 107 mm and range = 2,5 km .... So think about how effective it can be when "shooting" in the "forehead"!
      1. +3
        April 21 2022 12: 02
        Quote: Nikolaevich I
        Remote control is equipped with ATGM "Stugna-P" ...! As far as I know, "Corsair" has no such

        Yes, "Stguna" has a remote control unit (up to 50 meters, sort of)

        "Corsair" has no such thing. He was positioned as a "very budget" Javelin "for shooting from the shoulder.
        "Corsair" is a very strange craft, but "Stguna" turned out to be a rather dangerous complex.
        1. 0
          April 21 2022 13: 40
          Now Cornet also has such a remote control
          1. 0
            April 22 2022 18: 08
            Now Cornet also has such a remote control

            Present evidence of the presence of a remote control for a portable "Cornet"
  8. 0
    April 21 2022 06: 14
    You can argue as much as you like

    Not all Ukrainian ATGM operators have the proper level of training and can effectively use their weapons. In addition, the complexes show the best results in open areas, and battles often take place in urban areas, which limit the viewing and launch range.


    but the main thing remains

    If the Javelin missile manages to find a target and locks on it, a hit is not guaranteed.


    and that says it all and that cannot be justified by the ability of the javelin to hit sheds, chicken coops and outdated equipment without remote sensing.
  9. The comment was deleted.
    1. +2
      April 21 2022 06: 37
      4,7 km? I "heard" somewhat different data ... well, oh well (!) ... anyway, this is for the latest modification, which was not sent to Ukraine! "Official" ("guaranteed") data is 2,5 km! (Yes, there were cases when the GOS "took" longer distances, because the engine can drag a javelin even 4 km, but this is a matter of chance!)
      1. +7
        April 21 2022 06: 49
        The author manipulates words like an experienced bartender with drinks.
        So it turns out - it seems like a dangerous thing, but ... not dangerous.
        Example? Quote:
        Foreign sources who do not share such optimism give more modest figures.

        What are these publications? What number?
        Here I am "herding" on the oryx import site with photo and video evidence. There, the numbers are constantly changing and, more often than not, not in our direction.
        Well, or a photo of a tank that withstood three hits.
        No longer NLAW, but simply missiles and for some reason this illustration is for the article with "javelins" ...
        1. 0
          April 21 2022 07: 25
          Quote: Leader of the Redskins
          The author manipulates words like an experienced bartender with drinks.
          So it turns out - it seems like a dangerous thing, but ... not dangerous.
          Example? Quote:
          Foreign sources who do not share such optimism give more modest figures.

          What are these publications? What number?
          Here I am "herding" on the oryx import site with photo and video evidence. There, the numbers are constantly changing and, more often than not, not in our direction.
          Well, or a photo of a tank that withstood three hits.
          No longer NLAW, but simply missiles and for some reason this illustration is for the article with "javelins" ...

          Oryx if you look, then the hair stands on end, unless of course everything is true there. It may have seemed to me, but it seems that some photos duplicate each other.
          1. +1
            April 21 2022 13: 50
            Quote: leks
            Oryx if you look, then the hair stands on end, unless of course everything is true there. It may have seemed to me, but it seems that some photos duplicate each other.

            There are errors and inaccuracies. I would estimate an error of 5%. The site was not noticed in outright lies, I see more than one war there, everything is beating. The largest + has photos / screenshots. And keep in mind the losses of the Russian Federation + LDNR there, they do not share them, which is correct.
            1. +1
              April 21 2022 19: 28
              Quote: OgnennyiKotik
              Quote: leks
              Oryx if you look, then the hair stands on end, unless of course everything is true there. It may have seemed to me, but it seems that some photos duplicate each other.

              There are errors and inaccuracies. I would estimate an error of 5%. The site was not noticed in outright lies, I see more than one war there, everything is beating. The largest + has photos / screenshots. And keep in mind the losses of the Russian Federation + LDNR there, they do not share them, which is correct.

              That is, if you look at this site and how you say that everything is true! It turns out that the Russian Federation + LDNR suffered losses in equipment, almost 3,5 times more than the Ukrainians.
              Who then can trust the official data of MORF or accountants who for some reason believe that Ukrainians practically do not lose equipment. Two months of war and they counted 900 lost units on this site. Do you yourself believe in it!?
              1. -2
                April 22 2022 18: 30
                Quote: leks
                then who should trust the official data of MORF or accountants who for some reason believe that Ukrainians practically do not lose equipment

                For you, the MO is the ultimate truth? How many of our aircraft and helicopters have been lost according to their data?
                1. +1
                  April 22 2022 19: 30
                  Quote: Pilat2009
                  Quote: leks
                  then who should trust the official data of MORF or accountants who for some reason believe that Ukrainians practically do not lose equipment

                  For you, the MO is the ultimate truth? How many of our aircraft and helicopters have been lost according to their data?

                  Did the RF Ministry of Defense publish data on our losses in technology?
                  For you, it turns out the ultimate truth, this is a foreign site where photos and videos of dill are thrown off, where it is written about this a little lower.
                  It’s good when the technique is the same, you can record your losses as losses on the other side. Take photos and videos from the right angle and send them to naive admins of a foreign site.
                  1. -1
                    April 22 2022 20: 09
                    Quote: leks
                    Quote: Pilat2009
                    Quote: leks
                    then who should trust the official data of MORF or accountants who for some reason believe that Ukrainians practically do not lose equipment

                    For you, the MO is the ultimate truth? How many of our aircraft and helicopters have been lost according to their data?

                    Did the RF Ministry of Defense publish data on our losses in technology?
                    For you, it turns out the ultimate truth, this is a foreign site where photos and videos of dill are thrown off, where it is written about this a little lower.
                    It’s good when the technique is the same, you can record your losses as losses on the other side. Take photos and videos from the right angle and send them to naive admins of a foreign site.

                    The fact of the matter is that it didn’t publish. But it cheerfully publishes the losses of Ukraine.
        2. -4
          April 21 2022 07: 29
          The entire "5th Guards TA" burned ""?
          As near Prokhorovka ...
          1. 0
            April 21 2022 08: 04
            Don't know. Unit numbers are mentioned only in the reports of the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine. But there you need to "divide" by two)
            1. +2
              April 21 2022 08: 18
              Foreign websites can't lie...
        3. +2
          April 21 2022 07: 41
          Comments critical of this author are removed. Use less water in your articles.
          1. +4
            April 21 2022 08: 03
            Many COMMENTERS were "removed". Even without the right to write...
            And after all, many sensible. Real encyclopedias.
            I hope they will be returned after SVO ....
        4. +3
          April 21 2022 08: 04
          Quote: Leader of the Redskins
          The author manipulates words like an experienced bartender with drinks.
          So it turns out - it seems like a dangerous thing, but ... not dangerous.
          Example? Quote:
          Foreign sources who do not share such optimism give more modest figures.

          What are these publications? What number?
          Here I am "herding" on the oryx import site with photo and video evidence. There, the numbers are constantly changing and, more often than not, not in our direction.
          Well, or a photo of a tank that withstood three hits.
          No longer NLAW, but simply missiles and for some reason this illustration is for the article with "javelins" ...

          Yes, and the range of the author is too small, but a little further too big
        5. -1
          April 24 2022 10: 06
          How true is this site? The belonging of the equipment that both Russia and Ukraine have is sometimes impossible to establish from the photo. You never know what the Ukrainians took pictures of. )) Do you suggest that "gentlemen take their word for it"? Like like ballingcat charlatans? Still, they dragged links from your censor or an apostrophe! :)))
      2. +7
        April 21 2022 09: 22
        well, oh well (!) ... anyway, this is the latest modification, which was not sent to Ukraine!

        The "newest" modification, which has a range of 4 km, has been around for 16 years already.
        "Official" ("guaranteed") data is 2,5 km! (Yes, there were cases when the GOS "took" longer distances, because the engine can drag a javelin even 4 km, but this is a matter of chance!)

        Raytheon official data is from 65 to 4000 meters.
        It's not about the case, and not about the rocket, it's about the electronics and optics of that same Combat Launch Unit. Portable options for the control module limited the capabilities of the rocket to 2,5 km (CLU Block I) and the current 4 km (LCLU). When installed on the same Stryker using Stryker optics, the rocket just squeezes out those same 4,7 km in Direct Mode.
        The FGM-148 has one significant drawback - the high cost.
        There is also one insignificant one - weather conditions can affect the capture of the GOS target. But the conditions of sandstorms and similar weather disasters for the territory of Ukraine are irrelevant.
        1. 0
          April 21 2022 11: 53
          Quote: Nefarious skeptic
          The "newest" modification, which has a range of 4 km, has been around for 16 years already.

          Haven't they been "bent"? lol This means, according to you, that it appeared in 2006. According to my information, after 2010 ... One modification "worth" is the date: 2018 ... Modification F with a cumulative fragmentation warhead and increased to 4 km range entered the troops in 2020 ...
          1. +3
            April 21 2022 12: 12
            No, I didn't. Yes, shooting at 4 km has been possible since 2006. And what is modification F for? In it, from what directly affects combat use, only the appearance of a multifunctional warhead. With modification C, 4 km are definitely available - I repeat once again the point is not in the rocket, but in the CLU. Use CLU Block 0, not Block 1, and even forget about 2,5 km - a maximum of 2.
            The fact that everything revolves around a range of 2,5 km has little to do with the technical component, even in the latest models in the instructions for use you will see an operating range of 2,5 km - consider this a doctrine of use, and not a technical limitation.
            1. +6
              April 21 2022 12: 53
              2,5 km range - consider this a doctrine of use, not a technical limitation.
              IMHO, for tanks on the European theater of operations, 1,5 km was considered the most realistic distance for mutual detection and combat.
              The Israelis, IMHO, even by 1973 were training to shoot up to 2,5 km for a tank battle.
              4 km range (with line of sight to the target) is a bonus for a very rare situation.
              1. +1
                April 21 2022 13: 06
                Because if you let enemy tanks 2-3 km to the positions of your troops, then you made mistakes in planning and your reconnaissance does not work. Both the Israelis and the Americans have a very definite opinion on this matter. I agree with him.
            2. 0
              April 21 2022 15: 54
              Quote: Nefarious skeptic
              And what is modification F for?

              Yes, here's what! The Internet is becoming rather uninformative ... data when the LWCLU unit began to enter the troops is not so easy to find! So you have to "twist" ... for example, modification F has a range of 4 km ... which means that a "light" CLU has been installed ... F has been entering the troops since 2020 ... Aha! So, LWCLU appeared no later than 2020! Etc...! (We read: the modification has a range of 4 km and has been supplied since 2017 ... so it is equipped with a "light" block ... and so on ...)
              1. 0
                April 21 2022 16: 08
                So that I can analyze this news in more detail, I would like to understand where you got it from. It may just be such an unsuccessful form of presenting the material that could mislead you.
                PS It is regrettable to admit, but only the Russian-speaking segment of the Internet becomes uninformative (((There are no such problems in the English-speaking segment. The only thing is that you almost always have to pay in it to get valuable information.
              2. +1
                April 21 2022 16: 18
                By the way, thanks to you, I had to refresh my memory, and it turned out that she let me down, I sprinkle ashes on my head. LCLU actually appeared after 2010, in 2013. In 2006 - Block I.
                And deliveries of missiles with multifunctional warheads were scheduled for the 2016 financial year. It turns out that deliveries were delayed for 4 years if you found that they began in 2020. The complete replacement of Block I with LCLU will occur before 2023.
                PS I followed the rearmament of the "potential enemy" on the site www.dote.osd.mil. But now we have no access to it.
                1. +1
                  April 21 2022 17: 10
                  Quote: Nefarious skeptic
                  I sprinkle ashes on my head

                  Here you see! And I "thanks" to you a full glass of homemade liquor (tasty, but strong ... strong, but tasty!) "waved" with grief! recourse Well, now ... it happens! All is well that ends well! wink And as for the multifunctional warhead ... indeed (!), The delay came from the Americans! Yes
      3. Quote: Nikolaevich I
        4,7 km? I "heard" somewhat different data ... well, oh well (!).

        These are new modifications.
  10. Two
    +1
    April 21 2022 07: 00
    hi If only it didn't get to the "Spikes" ...
    1. 0
      April 21 2022 10: 45
      Israel forbade transferring them to Ukraine.
    2. -1
      April 21 2022 10: 55
      What, Spike is much better?
      1. +3
        April 21 2022 11: 12
        Quote from Zack Levy
        What, Spike is much better?

        On the head it is better, depending on the modification, on two heads. We are very lucky that Israel fundamentally does not sell weapons to Ukraine. Their UAVs, electronic warfare systems, missile weapons are superior to everything in the world.
        1. +1
          April 21 2022 12: 40
          Will now be:
          it's all cartoons!
          untrained operators!
          ban propaganda!
          Ukrainians still can't!
          how are you all lying here


          IMHO, and it will come to the Spikes.
          The balance between the interests of the Russian Federation and Israel - we do not allow serious weapons into sensitive areas for Israel, Israel does not supply Georgia / Ukraine - has already been violated "de facto". So far, the S300 to Syria and helmets and armor to Ukraine, but the opinion in Israel is clear on whose side and this is just the beginning.
          "Defense Minister Benny Gantz signed a permit for the supply of helmets and body armor to Ukraine for the first time. Gantz informed the Minister of Defense of Ukraine that he had authorized the purchase of protective equipment for Ukrainian rescuers and civilian organizations.
          “The ice has broken,” Ukrainian Ambassador Yevhen Korniychuk commented on Gantz’s decision
          ....Vladimir Zelensky also asked for help with other types of defensive weapons - in particular, missile defense systems:
          "Why don't we get weapons from you? Why didn't you join the sanctions against Russia? Everyone knows that your missile defense is the best in the world. You are great, you know how to defend yourself. Help us protect ourselves, protect Ukrainians, Ukrainian Jews.”
          Recently, Russia has begun to show dissatisfaction with Israeli policies and even accused Jerusalem of “seeking to divert attention from the occupation of Palestinian territories. Israeli Ambassador Alex Ben-Zvi was summoned to the Russian Foreign Ministry "for an explanation."
          "
          https://news.israelinfo.co.il/politics/102337
          1. +1
            April 21 2022 13: 05
            Quote: Wildcat
            and it will come to the Spikes.

            I do not think that the leadership of the Russian Federation and Israel have too close ties, too many common interests. Ammunition, medicine, etc. is quite possible.
            1. +3
              April 21 2022 13: 15
              The leaders of Israel and Ukraine have close ties.
              And Benet is not quite Netanyahu.
              To put it mildly, there is a country that, if necessary, Artsau19 "can repeat."
              Let's wait and see what else Israel will give Ukraine.
              1. 0
                April 21 2022 13: 34
                Quote: Wildcat
                Let's wait and see what else Israel will give Ukraine.

                "In England* there are no permanent allies, no permanent enemies. England* there are only permanent interests"
                *substitute the name of any country.
  11. +1
    April 21 2022 07: 01
    Expensive, of course, according to the concrete cellar of grandmother Josephine "Javelin" ... but because of the economy, the staff wanted to supplement it with a "laser" "Griffin"! ... Well, it's like we decided to supplement "Cornet" with "Bulat". ...
  12. +1
    April 21 2022 07: 44
    Where was the site with the affected armored vehicles since 2014, is it alive? Anyone share a link?
    ps the author conducted an analysis based on social data. networks smile
  13. +2
    April 21 2022 07: 53
    The effectiveness of ATGM FGM-148 Javelin

    Based on the analysis of the combat use of Javelin anti-tank systems against Russian equipment during the operation in Ukraine, their modernization may begin. First of all, the missile's homing head will undergo changes. The upgrade process will take a long time.
    The FGM-148 Javelin ATGM does not have a target recognition system. If it is delivered, the price will rise from $200 to $0,5-1 million.
    https://www.gazeta.ru/army/news/2022/04/19/17595548.shtml?
  14. -7
    April 21 2022 07: 56
    In terms of price / quality, this is an expensive and almost useless complex, so everyone uses Toy and Kornets. In fact, the Americans used the Jewelins as an RPG, it’s not a pity to throw out $ 300 to shoot at a wall in the city, not their own.
    1. +1
      April 21 2022 09: 00
      that's not 300! And only $000...
  15. mva
    +6
    April 21 2022 08: 03
    Ryabov Kirill, have you at least familiarized yourself with the subject you are writing about? Where will the T-72B3 and any other tanks of the Russian Federation get dynamic protection units in the upper hemisphere? And your photo is fake, it wasn’t Javelin that worked, it hits the wreck, and not the side hemisphere :) To protect against Javelin, they build such home-made chicken coops.
    [Center]
    1. 0
      April 21 2022 08: 53
      And they said about the photo that there were 3 NLAWs.
    2. 0
      April 21 2022 08: 59
      And they also load up with all sorts of improvised means ... bags, boxes, etc.
    3. -3
      April 21 2022 13: 32
      “It wasn’t the Javelin that worked, it hits the crush, and not the side hemisphere.” The javelins have two modes of operation, attack from the hill and attack in the side projection, the operator can switch them and select the desired one.
      1. mva
        0
        April 21 2022 14: 58
        In a side projection, they are used on stationary fortifications, on a tank only a mentally disabled person will hit in a side projection if the range allows (at the limit of the range in a side projection is justified).
  16. -3
    April 21 2022 08: 42
    With bravado reports of effectiveness and success, they were to destroy all of Our combat tanks and those not involved in the conflict.
    1. mva
      -1
      April 21 2022 09: 27
      Everything is basically impossible. This task is only possible for the Lord God, however.
  17. +1
    April 21 2022 08: 52
    Where is the actual information? Well, they fired at the T-55 and T-72 early in Iraq, they pierced. What is in Ukraine, no one knows. And no one will say before victory, but the number of missiles used, well, they are used by ours, a lot of missiles are lost in warehouses and during shelling. Or buried in Galician villages. Maybe 10 percent of the availability reach the launch. There are a lot of armored objects in battle and in addition to tanks, even more than tanks, and they are also fired at from what is at hand, it is unlikely that there is a difference for the BTR-82A, they will hit it from a "jevelin" or from an ancient "bassoon" . A jet will hit something important, it will be bad, it will not hit, it will just be a hole.
  18. -1
    April 21 2022 08: 52
    During the operation of the FGM-148 Javelin ATGM, it performed well overall. In some situations, it fully realized its potential and even went beyond the original functions ... In general, despite all the limitations and problems, the Javelin remains a modern and fairly effective anti-tank missile system. Don't underestimate him and ignore the threat he poses...

    Such an opinion, expressed in an article on a Russian patriotic website, should be understood as: "The Javelin complex is a very effective weapon. Deadly for armored vehicles."
    1. -8
      April 21 2022 11: 07
      Such an opinion, expressed in an article on a Russian patriotic website, should be understood as: "The Javelin complex is a very effective weapon. It is deadly for armored vehicles."

      So where is the video of the application in a real battle on tanks, and most importantly, where is the efficiency? ))))
      Even in Syria there are a lot of videos of the use of Javelin, but not in Ukraine))))
      If the Javelin were as effective as you are all lying here, then with its help it would be possible to knock out all the enemy tanks and go on a COUNTEROFFENSIVE, after all, the enemy’s armored vehicles were knocked out, right?
      But this is not even close, there is not even a photo of wrecked tanks with a tank breaking through into the upper hemisphere.
      But in words, yes - Javelin you have a fierce imba.
      But where are the facts? )))
      1. -1
        April 21 2022 12: 04
        When the "Stugna" is working, it is not difficult to make a video with a phone, removing the monitor of the complex, and there are a lot of such videos on the Internet, with damaged tanks, armored personnel carriers, "Solntsepeks" and other equipment. With the Javelin, this will not work - there is no monitor, so the video is shot infrequently, but they are.
        On Youtube you can find a video from the drone:

        Here at 2:44 you can clearly see the work of "Javelin":
      2. 0
        April 22 2022 18: 36
        Quote: lucul
        But where are the facts? )))

        The facts are that Russia has been marking time for the second month, and the number of prisoners offered for exchange is approaching 500
  19. -3
    April 21 2022 09: 00
    Quote: GRIGORIY76
    Petrel, Poseidon, avant-garde also belong here?

    For some reason, not ours, but very American media are yelling about them, that they are lagging behind in hypersound, and Poseidon should be completely banned in the new START treaty. So it’s the other way around with them - there are weapons and they work, but there are no sects. Here, for example, with the Petriots, how? They can’t shoot down, but there is a sect - a child prodigy. The F-35 was not useful anywhere, and the Germans see it with a passive radar for 200 km, but there is a sect of invisibility.
    And the Vanguard slammed the anti-nuclear bunker with one missile, and no one is yelling that the Vanguard alone will win the whole world, PKK zhabelin with bayraktar. Or Zamvolt
    1. -1
      April 21 2022 13: 19
      Today, the sectarians of the apiralistic prodigies are especially fierce-minus. We went straight on the attack. They were going to liberate Volyn-Kalyn laughing
  20. -1
    April 21 2022 09: 08
    In general, I would like to recall an excerpt from Alexei Isaev's book "10 Myths of World War II" already in 2005, the chapter about miracle tanks. In fact, absolutely any tank can be knocked out. And not only from an ambush, but even head-on, in any coherent army there were the same anti-aircraft guns with a caliber of 75 mm or more, and talk about some real protection against the PAK-40, "aht-aht" 17-pounder, or the Soviet 85 mm anti-aircraft guns are not necessary, it is only fundamentally new tanks to make, which is more difficult than increasing the power of weapons. T-34-85 in the 42nd required 4-5 hits to fail, in the 45th 1.8. Did this somehow prevent the Soviet tank troops from entering Berlin? It's just that with some correct tactics, the question of the survival of moderately protected tanks can be solved by knocking out anti-tank weapons. And with the "Jevelins" everything is exactly the same here, even before the launch, some of the missiles will be destroyed. And in any case, at least a dozen missiles must be stocked for each enemy tank.
    1. mva
      -4
      April 21 2022 09: 22
      Well, well, even before the launch :) Jewelin does not need a direct line of sight, he can be launched from cover, just up, and he will find the tank himself. It is very interesting how many Jewels will be destroyed if they are sitting in a shelter (folds of vegetation, buildings, etc.)?
      1. +1
        April 21 2022 09: 58
        Jewelin does not need direct visibility, he can be launched from cover, just to the top, and he will find the tank himself.

        No
        1. mva
          -2
          April 21 2022 10: 10
          Yes. One of the modes, but the target must be well warmed up (shooting from a cannon, for example, or a long-running engine). You can also crush the sight, then there will be a specific target, but auto-capture is also possible.
          1. +3
            April 21 2022 11: 41
            No. There is only one homing mode (you are confusing with two attack modes) - the operator selects the area from which an infrared image is taken, which is stored in the missile's memory. Without completion of this operation, the launch is generally impossible.
            Here is this operation in Training Manual 09397B-12/1A (TM 9-1425-688-10)



            Even more informative is written in Training Circular 3-22.37
            1. mva
              0
              April 22 2022 11: 46
              How does Training Circular 3-22.37 relate to product specifications? It is clear that if the fire is aimed, you need to learn to aim. Automatic fire does not need to be trained. And aiming in most cases is necessary. the real battlefield is full of heat emitters (fires, explosions, etc.). Look at the Texas Instruments jdavelin advertisement (vidia) there is a direct example of how a tank located on the other side of a small hill (without line of sight) is struck. Do you think that if he couldn’t do that, the producer would shoot such a commercial?
              1. 0
                April 22 2022 12: 02
                How does Training Circular 3-22.37 relate to product specifications?

                The most direct thing is that he unequivocally makes it clear that there is no "automatic" fire. And it wasn't supposed to.
                Automatic fire does not need to be trained.

                Of course not - because there is no automatic fire
                Check out Texas Instruments jdavelin ad

                Give me a link, I'll take a look.
      2. +1
        April 21 2022 11: 12
        Is it hard to live without an elementary school physics course? One can even believe that infrared radiation will pass through the wall. "Jevelin" requires keeping the target in sight for some time, so that the head could begin to track the heat source, or turn on the usual grenade launcher mode, if you need to blow up the barn, or a tank with an idle engine. How is it there in a battle with strong fires nearby, I generally HZ. Shooting from jet weapons in confined spaces is generally more dangerous for the shooter than for the enemy.
        1. +3
          April 21 2022 11: 46
          or turn on the usual grenade launcher mode, if you need to blow up a barn, or a tank with an idle engine.

          There are no "conventional grenade launcher modes")))
          Always "homing mode" for infrared contrast.
          1. -1
            April 21 2022 13: 56
            Learn materiel. If you need to blow up an object that does not radiate anything, then the "jevelin" is used in the flight mode in a straight line. Yes, and against radiating targets, there are at least 2 trajectories.
            1. +4
              April 21 2022 14: 10
              Learn materiel.

              Well, where can I


              Do you understand the concept of "contrast"? There is no need to radiate anything, it is enough to be contrasting.
              PS I suspect that you also understand "straight flight mode" literally))
      3. +1
        April 21 2022 15: 13
        Have you read the comment of our Bulgarian comrade? There about aiming is clearly described. What else - just up, and he will find the tank himself? Another wunderwaffle lover.
  21. -1
    April 21 2022 09: 36
    If you believe the photo confirmations from the Oryx website, then the effectiveness of this ATGM is at a high level.
    Although the picture is quite unpleasant ...

    According to the photo from the T-72B3, they wrote that this is NLAW, although there is no confirmation of this. It is not known what was fired at this tank.
    1. 0
      April 23 2022 10: 53
      I agree, it is not known what it was hit with, but first of all we are talking about three anti-tank shots. This is not about luck, but about a real miracle. However, my Christian upbringing forces me to acknowledge the existence of miracles.
  22. 0
    April 21 2022 09: 36
    Quote: maksbazhin
    Where was the site with the affected armored vehicles since 2014, is it alive? Anyone share a link?
    ps the author conducted an analysis based on social data. networks smile

    https://lostarmour.info/ Был такой сайтик. Но сейчас не грузится. И Tor -ом не грузится. И Tor сам не подключается. Короче, похоже, война...
  23. 0
    April 21 2022 13: 24
    And how does the infrared seeker of a rocket capture a target that is not contrasting in the IR range, let's say the same fortified structure, if its thermal picture merges with the temperature picture of the landscape?
    1. +3
      April 21 2022 14: 00
      Your ambient temperature changes during the day, you will have a contrast in any real case, since different materials accumulate, retain and give off heat in different ways. It is not so easy to make the target non-contrasting, the Israelis and Scandinavians have long been puzzled by this problem, we are also working in this direction.
  24. 0
    April 21 2022 14: 16
    During the invasion of Iraq in 2003, US troops used the Javelin for the first time on real enemy tanks. As reported, ATGM showed high efficiency.

    I always remember this video, the FGM-148 Javelin just annihilates the tank, not knocks it out. Jedi with a laser sword, just about nothing
  25. -3
    April 21 2022 14: 17
    If you carefully study the instructions for the Javelin anti-tank complex, you will find that in order to prepare the weapon for firing, you need to complete EIGHT! items, the execution of each of them takes an average of 45-50 seconds. This delay, when the target is in line of sight, even despite the advanced guidance system of the anti-tank complex, may be the last in the life of the operator. Further, the so-called “hill” of the Javelin missile is capable of performing only in the range from 1300 to 2400 meters, the enterprising Yankees are silent about this and the most interesting thing is that the US Marine Corps abandoned the Javelins, saying that they need a weapon ready to shoot immediately, without preparation.
    1. +1
      April 21 2022 14: 42
      Who are these fairy tales for?
      1. +3
        April 21 2022 15: 05
        For most of the forum.
  26. -3
    April 21 2022 19: 38
    Javelin, javelin... Not a single wunder waffle determines the outcome of a battle, battle, and even more so, a campaign. Everything is decided by balance, general modernity and skill of the STRUCTURES participating in the actions.
  27. +1
    April 21 2022 19: 38
    The article is about nothing. What kind of effectiveness can we talk about (or guess) when NOTHING is known about the results of the application. Personally, for some conclusions, I would like to know the following:
    - the number of missiles fired at targets
    - the number of missiles that hit the target
    - the number of completely destroyed targets (preferably with an indication of how many missiles were spent on average on a destroyed target)
  28. -2
    April 22 2022 12: 55
    despite all the limitations and problems, the Javelin remains a modern and fairly effective anti-tank missile system.


    ... a toy from computer games ... a real (and not "barmaley" on a shaitan-mobile) enemy and real conditions will put everything in its place .... but what a profit!
  29. 0
    April 23 2022 10: 47
    It is unacceptable to promote the exploitation of weapons. Weapons are machines and must be judged objectively. To say that the Javelin is inefficient or expensive is nonsense. When you ask the cost of something, it means you cannot buy it. Of course, like any weapon system, it is not one hundred percent effective. But definitely more than many think. In my opinion, the South Korean AT-1K Ray Bolt is interesting in the industry. It is similar to the Javelin in its driving style, warhead power and range, and costs less but surpasses it. It takes about 30 seconds for a Javelin missile to cool a charge-coupled device (IR-CCD) for guidance. At first glance it seems small, but on the battlefield it is not. This is because the shooter must hold a heavy rocket launcher on their shoulder and aim for at least 30 seconds. Meanwhile, if the location of an enemy tank is discovered, the mission cannot be completed and the shooter's life cannot be guaranteed.
    On the other hand, Hyungung has adopted an uncooled infrared CCD camera and a visible light camera. This allows you to quickly aim and shoot both day and night. In addition, Ray Bolt costs less than Javelin. After the events in Ukraine, the market for anti-tank missiles "launched and forgotten" shows signs of explosive growth. As for the future of tanks, then, perhaps, here we need to start thinking in terms of remote-controlled tanks.
  30. 0
    April 24 2022 22: 21
    "Stugna" will be more interesting
  31. 0
    April 28 2022 21: 26
    Works best in open areas. But in open areas, tanks, as a rule, go after working out in this area by Solntsepek and Pinocchio. As if these machines were created to work in conjunction with tanks. Pre and outdoor. Here is such a coincidence.
  32. -1
    21 May 2022 10: 51
    The disappearance of the turret grilles that were made to protect against the javelin clearly demonstrates that he was not a prodigy at all
  33. 0
    21 May 2022 10: 52
    Due to the low flight speed, an effective countermeasure will be:
    one . vehicles with the "Baikal" complex as part of tank units (based on the T-1, since combat stability is required in the first line with tanks).
    2. the introduction of elements of network-centric control by both subunits and the distribution of data on the weapons used by the enemy with the possibility of firing the nearest firepower both on the one who used the weapon and on the weapon itself (in this case, missiles).
    3. for effective destruction of missiles, it is necessary to introduce 30 mm shots with remote detonation into the ammunition nomenclature.
    4. massive introduction of KAZ into armored forces (the loss of a tank and a trained crew is not comparable to the cost of KAZ).
    1. 0
      22 June 2022 17: 42
      implementation of elements of network-centric management as divisions

      In the world of spherical vacuum. Russian tankers use Chinese Bao Feng walkie-talkies, which they bought with their own money.
      What you proposed in peacetime could not be implemented, how do you propose to do it now, under conditions of previously unthinkable external restrictions?
      IMHO, they will press "the old fashioned way" simply by numbers, gradually gaining experience and regardless of losses. How many people do we have with an income of less than 20000 rubles?
      I Now the idea is clear why there is so little "middle class" and 100000+ rubles is received by no more than 10-15% of the population.
      to effectively destroy missiles, it is necessary to introduce 30 mm shots with remote detonation into the range of ammunition.

      Where to get it?? Especially now?
      massive introduction of KAZ into armored forces (the loss of a tank and a trained crew is not comparable to the cost of KAZ).

      So far, only Israel and the United States have been able to massively introduce KAZ (purchasing 1200+ kits from Israel).
      And even they DO NOT work against the roof-breakers. The US-developed (but stopped) Quick Kill system would fit here:

      Due to the low airspeed

      The speed is sufficient for a range of 3 km.
      It does not make the operator vulnerable (unlike 2nd generation ATGMs).
      Please note: the Javelin ATGM uses a low-smoke engine, the missile is almost impossible to notice. And also - it has a deflectable thrust vector, which allows you to make energetic maneuvers.
  34. 0
    11 June 2022 10: 11
    A very effective device, completely incomparable with an RPG ...
  35. 0
    22 June 2022 17: 36
    There are also disadvantages, such as the high cost of the complex and missiles

    Absolutely irrelevant. The affected tank is an order of magnitude (10 times) more expensive. The ATGM is produced by the richest country in the world (besides money, having technology, trained personnel, all the complex components for this), and gives it away for free. All the talk about “let's see how Ukraine will pay later” is absurd, because in the event of a defeat, it will most likely simply cease to exist, will be annexed.
    A recent map at SPIEF testifies to these plans.
    1. 0
      22 June 2022 18: 13
      This map is:
  36. +1
    3 July 2022 17: 15
    Javelin in this conflict is absolutely not effective weapons. There is only one reason, the overwhelming superiority of the allied forces in artillery and aviation.
    There are no tank wedges with motorized infantry on which one could safely use these weapons without a big risk of being immediately destroyed. And therefore they do not use and therefore leave a large number of unused anti-tank guns in positions. In the city, too, there is no option to apply, isolated cases of application. None of the Armed Forces of Ukraine wants to be suicide bombers .... Therefore, the fate of these weapons, by and large, will either be destroyed in warehouses or be captured by the allies))
    But the allied forces have much more options to use it, and here it will be much more effective!
    1. +1
      5 July 2022 11: 11
      The effectiveness of anti-tank systems is the ratio of the number of missile launches to the number of affected armored vehicles that are unable to continue combat. All this talk about destruction in warehouses and the seizure of unused complexes is not about the effectiveness of weapons. Fools and cowards can make even the best weapons ineffective. Examples in recent history - more than enough! Moreover, the allied forces of the Jewelins and Stingers are also already using it. Let's wait for their impressions
  37. +1
    5 July 2022 11: 09
    I think that our experts are already testing captured ATGMs. Be patient a little, and infa will appear. After all the necessary measures are taken, the info will definitely appear, I think there will be photos. And it’s stupid to downplay the danger of anti-tank systems and compare them with RPGs ... Several years ago, they wrote about Jevelin’s main drawback in front of our anti-tank systems - a very long time to initiate the complex. As long as all the gyroscopes spin up and all systems turn on, the tank can leave. Up to 22-30 seconds, if memory serves. Domestic anti-tank systems are initiated much faster (I don’t remember the numbers now)