Israeli first-generation anti-tank missile systems

50 129 37
Israeli first-generation anti-tank missile systems

Being surrounded by countries that wanted the physical liquidation of the Jewish state, the Israeli leadership paid special attention to providing its own armed forces with the most modern weapons. It was a logical consequence of this that the Israel Defense Forces became the first in the Middle East to adopt an anti-tank weapon. missile The first generation SS.10 anti-tank guided missile system (ATGM) with guided missiles equipped with a cumulative warhead.

First-generation ATGMs are generally considered to be systems with a manual guidance system, also known as three-point guidance (sight-missile-target), in which the gunner/operator, visually observing the target, manually adjusts the missile's trajectory (right, left, up, down) using a dedicated joystick. For improved visibility in poor visibility, the ATGM had a tracer or bright light at the rear. Commands to first-generation ATGMs were typically transmitted via wire, but radio command guidance was also sometimes used.



ATGM SS.10 and SS.11


The development of an anti-tank guided missile (ATGM) system was carried out in Nazi Germany during World War II (the X-7 Rotkappchen). However, the Germans were unable to mass-produce the ATGM, and engineers at the French company Nord Aviation adopted the German developments. The first prototype, designated Nord-5203, was tested in 1952. The system's refinement was completed in 1955, and it entered service with the French Army under the designation SS.10.


ATGM SS.10 on the launcher

Control commands were transmitted from a joystick to control surfaces mounted on the trailing edges of the missile's wings. The missile was tracked in flight using a tracer. The ATGMs were delivered to their position in a lightweight tin box, which also served as a launcher. The missile and box weighed 19 kg, allowing it to be carried by the crew. The missile was 850 mm long and had a wingspan of 750 mm. The 5 kg shaped-charge warhead could penetrate 400% homogeneous armor at normal angles. The first serial anti-tank missile had unimpressive combat characteristics. The launch range was in the range of 500-1600 m. The maximum flight speed of the ATGM, manually controlled with a joystick, was only 80 m/s, and the enemy танк had a good chance of dodging it.

Deploying the SS.10 ATGM was a rather laborious process, involving selecting a position, unloading the system components from the vehicles, assembling the ATGM, installing two batteries on each missile, attaching the warhead, deploying cables, and connecting the various components of the system. Each launcher had front and rear covers that had to be opened, as well as an inclinometer used to adjust the launcher's elevation to 12°. Trenches were dug when time allowed. All of this was handled by a four-person crew, including the gunner (also the commander), the driver of the vehicle transporting the ATGM components and the crew, and two assistant gunners.

During combat operations, the gunner, typically positioned 100-300 meters ahead of the ATGM firing position, would, upon detecting a target, give the command to prepare to fire. The assistant gunner, at the control panel, selected the missile by switching the signal generator via a distribution box to one of six launchers. The gunner then gave the "Fire" command, and the second gunner in the crew pressed the launch button. Success in using first-generation ATGMs depended heavily on the gunner's skill. After the missile had moved away from the gunner's position, he or she controlled its flight using the tracer. The gunner had to maintain the missile on a trajectory so that the tracer remained visible against the target throughout its entire flight. The transition from unguided to controlled flight after launch was the most critical stage of the guidance process. This required very smoothly lowering the missile to the aiming line and maintaining it there. After the ATGM was removed, its visual tracking was carried out through binoculars mounted on a tripod.

Bringing the missile to the line of sight required a high level of coordination on the part of the gunner—if the missile veered too far downward, it could crash into the ground before the next command could correct its trajectory. Special simulators were used to train and maintain the gunners' skills.


First-generation ATGM gunners were carefully selected. They were tested for vision and the ability to accurately assess the distance to a target, motor coordination, psychological stability, and command skills. To maintain the necessary skills, the gunners trained on a simulator for at least an hour daily.

Production of the SS.10 ATGM in France ended in early 1962. A total of 29,849 missiles were manufactured. More than half of the ATGMs produced were exported to 11 countries, including Israel. In 1955, a missile cost 340 francs, and a control unit cost 1750 francs. Thirty-six SS.10 systems entered service with the Israel Defense Forces in 1956, and they were all consolidated into the 755th Missile Battalion, which reported to Artillery command.

Initially, these ATGMs were transportable, but in 1958, the control equipment and SS.10 missiles began to be mounted on Dodge WC-52 all-terrain vehicles. Four ready-to-use ATGMs were stored in the rear of the vehicle.


The self-propelled complex could also control several launchers located on the ground.


Launch of the SS.10 ATGM from a self-propelled ATGM based on a Dodge WC-52 vehicle.

After all Israeli SS.10 ATGMs became self-propelled, the need for labor-intensive equipment of a firing position and digging trenches disappeared, after which the number of personnel for the complex was reduced to three people.

The Israeli SS.10 was first demonstrated to the general public during a military parade held in Haifa on May 2, 1960. Eight previously classified self-propelled anti-tank guided missiles were on display.


In fact, the SS.10 ATGMs were only used in experimental service by the IDF, were quickly superseded by more advanced systems, and were never used in actual combat. According to available documents, by mid-1962, the 755th Battalion was re-equipped with the SS.11 ATGM, which was developed by Nord Aviation based on the previous model.

When designing the SS.11 ATGM, the primary focus was on improving its combat and operational characteristics. At the time of its introduction, the SS.11 had impressive performance. Its 6,8 kg shaped-charge warhead penetrated 500 mm of armor, guaranteeing the destruction of any tank at the time. With a maximum missile velocity of 190 m/s, the maximum firing range was 3000 m.


ATGM SS.11

The guidance principle was the same as on the SS.10. A well-trained guidance operator could, on average, hit seven targets with ten missiles at the range. However, in real combat, at best one in three launched missiles hit the target, due to the stress of combat.

The SS.11 ATGM failed to gain traction as a portable infantry anti-tank weapon. This was primarily due to the weight and dimensions of the guidance system and missiles. For example, the guided missile, with a length of 1190 mm and a wingspan of 500 mm, weighed 30 kg. Therefore, SS.11 components were mounted on M3 Halftrack half-track armored personnel carriers. The self-propelled SS.11 ATGMs were first publicly displayed at a military parade held on April 29, 1963, in Haifa.


The armored personnel carrier carried control equipment and four missile launchers. Two additional missiles were carried inside the combat vehicle, and the battery of four self-propelled ATGMs was complemented by an ATGM transporter on the chassis of the same M3 BTR.


Anti-tank missiles could be guided from the carrier or using a remote control with a 50-meter cable. Since the M3 APCs were too heavy and bulky for use in airborne operations, several SS.11 systems were mounted on jeeps.

Israeli SS.11 self-propelled anti-tank missiles were used in the 1967 war, but the results of their combat use are not reliably known.


There are reports that systems mounted on half-tracked armored personnel carriers suppressed enemy fire during the assault on the Golan Heights, and two battery soldiers were killed by enemy small arms fire. According to unconfirmed reports, in 1968, an SS.11 missile hit a boat carrying Egyptian commandos. Two Egyptian soldiers were killed and two others were captured.

Guided missiles developed rapidly in the 1960s, and just seven years after their introduction into service, Israeli SS.11 ATGMs began to be decommissioned. Sources claim that by October 1973, several jeep-mounted ATGMs remained in service, with a total of 27 ATGMs. All of them were fired at the enemy, and by the end of the Yom Kippur War, no SS.11 systems remained in the IDF.

COBRA ATGM


After World War II, West Germany supplied Israel with weapons as part of its reparations payments. For political reasons, both sides kept this information confidential, leading Israeli authorities to deny for a long time that the IDF possessed West German COBRA anti-tank missiles.

The ATGM, with the full name Bölkow BO 810 COBRA (German: COBRA — Contraves, Oerlikon, Bölkow und Rakete), was jointly developed by the Swiss companies Oerlikon and Contraves and the West German Bölkow GmbH. The system, adopted by the Bundeswehr in 1960, was a lighter, more compact, and cheaper alternative to the French SS.11 ATGM.


ATGM COBRA, near the control panel and switch

The 950 mm long missile weighed 10,3 kg and had an average flight speed of approximately 100 m/s. Its notable feature was its ability to launch from the ground, without a dedicated launcher. Up to eight missiles, located 50 meters from the control panel, could be connected to the control unit. During firing, the gunner/operator could select the missile with the most favorable position relative to the target from the control panel. After the booster engine ignited, the ATGM climbed almost vertically to an altitude of 10-12 meters, after which the sustainer engine ignited, and the missile entered horizontal flight.

In terms of its characteristics, the Cobra was very similar to the Soviet Malyutka ATGM, but had a shorter launch range. The first version could hit targets at distances of up to 1600 meters; in 1968, a modification of the COBRA-2000 missile with a launch range of 200-2000 meters was introduced.


The missiles were equipped with two types of warheads: a shaped-charge fragmentation incendiary warhead and a shaped-charge warhead. The first type had a warhead weighing 2,5 kg and was filled with pressed hexogen with aluminum powder. The front end of the explosive charge had a conical recess containing a shaped-charge funnel made of red copper. Four segments containing pre-fabricated lethal and incendiary elements in the form of 4,5 mm steel balls and thermite cylinders were located along the side of the warhead. The armor penetration of this warhead was relatively low, no more than 300 mm, but it was still capable of effectively engaging manpower, destroying lightly armored vehicles and firing positions, and razing field fortifications. The second type of shaped-charge warhead weighed 2,3 kg and could penetrate a 470 mm steel armor plate at normal angles. The warheads of both types had piezoelectric detonators, consisting of two units: a head piezo generator and a base detonator.

Soviet specialists, who were able to examine COBRA ATGMs in the mid-1970s, noted that the German missiles, made primarily of inexpensive plastic and stamped aluminum alloy, were very inexpensive to produce. Although effective use of the ATGMs required highly trained operators and their launch range was relatively short, first-generation German ATGMs enjoyed some success on the global arms market. A total of over 170,000 missiles were produced by 1974.

In 1964, Israel received 1600 COBRA ATGMs and approximately 40 control panels worth $1,6 million. The IDF designated this system "Ashaf." In 1963, a group of Israeli soldiers underwent training in Germany. A mobile unit armed with COBRA ATGMs was formed within the 755th Missile Battalion. Jeep CJ-6 SUVs were used to transport the crews and the systems.


Due to the relative compactness of all the elements of the COBRA ATGM, it could be transported in backpacks and was used by Israeli paratroopers in the 1967 war.


These systems played a significant role in the battle near Lake Butmiya in the southern Golan Heights. Jeeps carrying ATGMs and M40A1 106mm recoilless rifles were delivered to the combat zone by heavy-lift SA 321 Super Frelon helicopters, which surprised the enemy and allowed for effective fire support for paratroopers armed with small arms.


Anti-tank gun crews struck trucks carrying Syrian infantry attempting to impede the Israeli advance, and, in conjunction with other firepower, held off the enemy until the main force with armored vehicles arrived, after which the Syrians, having suffered heavy losses, retreated.

In the late 1960s, the Israelis used Cobra guided missiles with some success during skirmishes with Egyptian forces across the Suez Canal. However, the COBRA ATGM was unpopular with the troops. Gunners found the missile difficult to control in flight, and its guidance accuracy left much to be desired. By 1973, the Cobra ATGMs were no longer in service, and they were not used in the Yom Kippur War. However, until the early 1980s, even after the Cobra systems were decommissioned, their use by the IDF was not officially acknowledged.

ATGM "Shmel"


As with the RPG-7 anti-tank grenade launcher, the main suppliers of anti-tank guided missile systems for the Israeli military were Egypt and Syria.

The 2K15 "Shmel" ATGM, developed in 1960 on the basis of the French SS.10, was the first Soviet anti-tank system armed with ATGMs. However, unlike the French version, this system was initially produced only as a self-propelled variant, mounted on the chassis of the GAZ-69 all-terrain vehicle and the BDRM-1 armored vehicle.

With a launch range of 600 to 2000 meters, the missile, equipped with a shaped-charge warhead, could penetrate 300 mm of armor. The 3M6 ATGM was guided manually via wires. The operator's task, as with its French counterpart, was to align the missile's tracer, flying at approximately 110 m/s, with the target. The ATGM's launch weight was 24 kg, and the warhead weighed 5,4 kg. Armor penetration was 300 mm. Firing range was 600-2000 meters.


3M6 ATGM from the 2K15 Shmel ATGM system

In the mid-1960s, the Soviet Union supplied Egypt with several dozen Shmel anti-tank missile systems based on the GAZ-69.


2P26 self-propelled launchers with 2K15 "Shmel" ATGMs at a parade in Cairo in 1965.

The front of the 2P26 SPU housed the driver and gunner (also the crew commander), while the rear housed the launcher with four guides, aimed toward the rear of the jeep in combat mode and upward in travel mode. Missile guidance could be performed from the vehicle or from a remote control with a 30-meter cable.

During the 1967 war, the Israel Defense Forces captured over two dozen 2P26 self-propelled launchers and about two hundred 3M6 ATGMs.


The captured anti-tank systems were subjected to rigorous testing, and during firing tests at the firing range, Israeli specialists came to the conclusion that, in terms of its main characteristics, the Soviet "Shmel" is close to the French SS.11.


In 1969, the 755th division, subordinated to the infantry, was transformed into a battalion, and two of its companies were armed with the Shmel ATGM.


Captured GAZ-69 vehicles suffered from frequent breakdowns, and some of the Soviet-made vehicles were equipped with an engine and gearbox from an American Jeep CJ-6.

On October 6, 1973, the 755th Battalion was alerted, and the following day, one of the anti-tank companies, armed with Shmel ATGMs, advanced to the Nafakh region of the Golan Heights. The company was broken up into platoons, and each platoon (four vehicles) took up firing positions. The Syrians detected the deployment of Israeli self-propelled anti-tank systems and launched a heavy artillery strike.


During the intense artillery shelling, vehicles and rockets were hit by shell fragments, and the anti-tank company ceased to exist as a combat unit.


During the artillery attack, the personnel were in underground shelters and suffered no casualties. The location of the second Israeli company, armed with Shmel ATGMs, is unknown. It was possibly deployed on the Jordanian border, in case that country entered the war from its territory. There is information that seven vehicles equipped with 3M6 ATGMs were destroyed or disabled during the Egyptian strike. aviation October 21, 1973. Thus, it can be concluded that the Shmel anti-tank missile systems in the IDF were mostly destroyed or heavily damaged during the fighting, failing to have any impact on the course of the war.

ATGM "Malyutka"


The most widely used Soviet first-generation ATGM was the 9K11 "Malyutka," adopted into service in 1963. This system featured numerous innovative features, proved to be very successful, and remained in service for a long time. Therefore, it's worth discussing it in more detail.

To meet the anti-tank missile's weight limit, the developers simplified the guidance system. The 9M14 ATGM became the first missile in our country with a single-channel guidance system to enter serial production. During development, plastics were extensively used to reduce the cost and labor intensity of manufacturing the missile. Fiberglass was used in the backpacks used to carry the ATGM components.


Compared to the 3M6 missile used in the Shmel system, the 9M14 ATGM was more than half the weight, weighing 10,9 kg, and the system was designed to be portable. All components of the 9K11 ATGM fit into three backpack-style suitcases. The 12,4 kg "suitcase," carried by the crew commander, contained the control panel with an optical sight and guidance equipment.


The main elements of the 9K11 Malyutka portable anti-tank missile system

The 9Sh16 monocular sight with eightfold magnification and a 22,5° field of view was used for target observation and missile guidance. Two anti-tank crew members carried backpacks containing two missiles and launchers. The launcher container with the ATGM weighed 18,1 kg. The ATGM launchers were connected by cable to the control panel and could be positioned up to 15 meters away.


A well-trained crew could convert the system from travel to combat mode in less than two minutes. The gunner/operator could engage two targets in a minute.

The 9M14 ATGM is capable of engaging targets at ranges of 500-3000 meters. Its 2,6 kg warhead penetrates 400 mm of armor at a normal angle, and 200 mm at a 60° impact angle. A solid-fuel motor accelerates the missile to a maximum velocity of 140 m/s. The average trajectory speed is 115 m/s. Flight time to maximum range is 26 seconds. The missile's fuse arming occurs 1,5-2 seconds after launch. A piezoelectric fuse detonates the warhead.


9M14 anti-tank missile on a launcher

In transport, the rocket's wings folded toward each other, so that with a 393 mm extended wing span, the transverse dimensions did not exceed 185 x 185 mm. When assembled, the rocket's length is 860 mm, its diameter is 125 mm, and its wingspan is 393 mm.


During preparation for combat use, the missile's disassembled components were removed from the fiberglass case and joined using special quick-release fasteners.

The warhead is attached to the wing compartment, which houses the main engine, servo, and gyroscope. The annular space around the main engine houses the booster motor's combustion chamber with a multi-particle charge, followed by the wire communication coil. A tracer is mounted on the outer surface of the missile body. The 9M14 missile has only one servo, which moves nozzles on two opposing oblique nozzles of the main engine. Pitch and yaw control are alternately achieved by rotating the servo at a speed of 8,5 rpm. Initial rotation is initiated during ignition of the booster motor with oblique nozzles.


In flight, rotation is maintained by adjusting the wing planes at an angle to the missile's longitudinal axis. To correlate the missile's angular position with the ground coordinate system, a gyroscope is used, mechanically spun up during launch. The missile has no onboard power sources; its single servo is powered by ground equipment via one of the circuits of a water-resistant three-wire cable. Since the missile was controlled manually after launch using a joystick, the hit probability was directly dependent on the operator's training. Under ideal test range conditions, a well-trained operator hit an average of 70% of targets.

In addition to the 9K11 man-portable ATGM, the Soviet Union supplied Egypt and Syria with 9P122 self-propelled ATGMs based on the BRDM-2, which also carried the Malyutka ATGM. Instead of a turret, this vehicle featured a hydraulically raised roof over the fighting compartment, housing two launchers with three missile launchers. The vehicle also carried eight spare ATGMs.


A 9P122 self-propelled anti-tank missile system combat vehicle captured by the IDF

Also before the 1973 war, the Arabs received BMP-1 tracked infantry fighting vehicles, which, in addition to the 73-mm smoothbore 2A28 Grom gun and the 7,62-mm PKT machine gun paired with the gun, had an anti-tank system with 9M14M ATGM (ammunition: 4 missiles).

Until October 1973, Egyptian and Syrian anti-tank units were well-equipped with Malyutka ATGMs. For example, the Egyptian infantry division had 30 portable 9K11 ATGMs, 14 BRDM-2-mounted ATGMs, and a BMP-1 battalion. The Syrian infantry division had 15 portable 9K11 ATGMs, which could be reinforced by separate battalions with 9P122 self-propelled ATGMs.

As of 1973, ATGMs based on the BRDM-2 and BMP-1 were state-of-the-art systems, and the Soviet Army's Ground Forces were still far from being equipped with them. For example, the 9P122 self-propelled ATGM entered service in 1968, and the BMP-1 in 1966. Nevertheless, as part of its global confrontation with the West, the Soviet leadership sanctioned the virtually free delivery of very large quantities of the most advanced weaponry to Egypt and Syria. However, this did not help the Arabs destroy Israel, and subsequently, a significant portion of the Soviet-made equipment and weapons were captured in working order by the IDF.

To be fair, the Malyutka ATGMs inflicted heavy losses on Israeli armor. During the Yom Kippur War, Arab infantry formations were heavily armed with anti-tank weapons. According to American estimates, over 1000 guided anti-tank missiles were launched at Israeli tanks. Israeli tank crews nicknamed the crews of the portable anti-tank missiles "tourists" for the distinctive appearance of their backpacks. However, the "tourists" proved to be a formidable force, managing to burn and immobilize approximately 300 M48 and M60 tanks. Even with active armor, approximately 50% of hits resulted in heavy damage or even fire.

The Arabs achieved such high ATGM effectiveness thanks to the fact that, at the request of Soviet advisers, the gunners continued training on simulators even in the frontline zone. According to unconfirmed reports, over 1000 IDF tanks were destroyed or damaged during the Yom Kippur War. Irrecoverable losses amounted to 407 tanks (365 in the south and 42 in the north)—243 tanks remained in enemy-held territory (229 in the south and 14 in the north). Of the 820 tanks evacuated to the rear, 164 were deemed beyond repair and, at best, were used as spare parts donors.

The enemy's widespread and highly successful use of anti-tank guided missiles in the initial stages of the war came as an unpleasant surprise to the IDF. However, after Israeli forces launched an offensive, the Egyptians and Syrians began abandoning equipment and weapons en masse. By the end of the active phase of the conflict, the Israelis had secured significant trophies, leading the Arabs to be considered one of the IDF's main arms suppliers in the 1970s.

The exact number of captured ATGMs is unknown, but so many were captured that the Malyutkas were used to fully arm not only the 755th Anti-Tank Missile Battalion (later renamed the 9304th Battalion), but also a number of other units. These included the formation of separate anti-tank companies in armored divisions and anti-tank platoons in paratrooper brigades. Even though Israel received a very significant number of second-generation BGM-71A TOW ATGMs from the US, at least until the early 1980s, the Malyutka portable and self-propelled anti-tank systems remained the most numerous in the IDF.


To train crews and maintain the required level of combat readiness, in addition to training on simulators, firing exercises were regularly conducted at firing ranges, where Soviet-made tanks unfit for further use were used as targets.


Anti-tank platoons of paratroop brigades and companies of armored divisions used 9K11 man-portable ATGMs. The systems and personnel were transported to the deployment site in light, all-terrain vehicles. Israel also developed a self-propelled version based on a jeep, but construction never progressed beyond a single prototype. The use of captured ATGMs was so widespread that guidance systems for them were manufactured in Israel. In the late 1970s, the idea of ​​establishing missile production was considered, but due to the rearmament of second-generation systems with a semiautomatic guidance system, this was abandoned.

In 1973, the Israelis captured 53 armored vehicles armed with Malyutkas, and in 1982, several more Syrian 9P122 self-propelled ATGMs were captured.


Two companies (at least 20 vehicles) of the 9304th Battalion were equipped with BRDM-2-based self-propelled anti-tank missile systems. Given that the technical documentation required for servicing the vehicles was in Russian, this unit included a significant number of technicians from the USSR. Repairs to the 9304th Battalion's vehicles were carried out using components and spare parts salvaged from other BRDM-2s stored at captured vehicle storage depots.


Israel continued to operate Malyutka antitank guided missile (ATGM) systems until at least the late 1980s. However, as recently as 20 years ago, operational systems and missiles for them were available at a testing ground where active protection systems for armored vehicles were developed and where multilayer and reactive armor were tested. Developing defenses against these seemingly hopelessly outdated missiles remains relevant, as Iranian- and Chinese-made systems are still in the possession of militant Islamist movements based in Lebanon and the Gaza Strip.

Продолжение следует ...
37 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +5
    29 January 2026 07: 08
    hi
    As always, great article!
  2. +3
    29 January 2026 07: 16

    The missiles were equipped with two types of warheads: a shaped-charge fragmentation incendiary warhead and a shaped-charge fragmentation incendiary warhead. The shaped-charge warhead weighed 2,5 kg and was filled with pressed hexogen with aluminum powder. The front end of the explosive charge had a conical recess containing a shaped-charge funnel made of red copper. Along the side of the warhead were four segments containing pre-fabricated lethal and incendiary elements in the form of 4,5 mm steel balls and thermite cylinders. The armor penetration of this warhead was relatively low, no more than 300 mm, but it was still capable of effectively engaging manpower, destroying lightly armored vehicles and firing positions, and breaching field fortifications.
    Oddly enough, I've encountered several interesting observations of ATGM hits: observers complained that infantry often scattered from damaged vehicles without showing any signs of suffering, even when the infantry was "riding armor." IMHO, the Cobra's dual-action warhead should have been effective against precisely this type of situation...
    request
    1. +4
      29 January 2026 09: 46
      Andrey, welcome!
      Quote: Wildcat
      Oddly enough, there were several interesting observations of ATGM hits: observers complained that infantry often scattered from the hit vehicles without showing any signs of suffering, even if the infantry was "riding on armor."

      There's nothing surprising about this. Unlike a mortar shell or artillery shell, an ATGM doesn't have a thick steel or cast-iron casing, but is composed primarily of plastic and light alloys that don't produce lethal fragments when the warhead detonates. The ATGM's lethal effect on personnel relies primarily on its high-explosive action.
  3. +1
    29 January 2026 07: 28
    [quote] As with the RPG-7 anti-tank grenade launchers, Egypt and Syria became the main suppliers of anti-tank guided missile systems for the Israeli military... The exact number of captured ATGMs is unknown, but so many were captured that the "Malyutkas" were used to fully arm not only the 755th Anti-Tank Missile Battalion (later renamed the 9304th Battalion), but also a number of other units. These included the formation of separate anti-tank companies in armored divisions and anti-tank platoons in paratroop brigades. Even taking into account that Israel received a very significant number of second-generation BGM-71A TOW ATGMs from the US, at least until the early 1980s, the Malyutka portable and self-propelled anti-tank missile systems were the most numerous in the IDF./quote] Hmm, an amazing ability, almost a glorious tradition, to choose the worst option of all possible options for a long time...
    crying
    1. +3
      29 January 2026 08: 07
      Were there better options?
      hi
      1. +3
        29 January 2026 09: 42
        Of course.
        Build socialism in one country, don’t spend billions of dollars on the Arabs.
        You see, the USSR would have been intact and the army would not have had to shoot at people, as in Cherkassk.
        There are only advantages to this approach.
        1. +6
          29 January 2026 09: 53
          Quote: Wildcat
          Of course.
          Build socialism in one country, don’t spend billions of dollars on the Arabs.
          You see, the USSR would have been intact and the army would not have had to shoot at people, as in Cherkassk.
          There are only advantages to this approach.

          Andrey, dear Alexey, apparently meant whether there was another better first-generation ATGM in the IDF.
          In my opinion, the Malyutka is unrivaled in its class. It's no coincidence that this system was copied by other countries, and the PLA still uses a version with semiautomatic guidance. The Malyutka's cost-effectiveness was unmatched, and it remained the primary ATGM in the Soviet Union until the early 1980s. It was officially decommissioned in the Russian Armed Forces in 1993.
          1. +2
            29 January 2026 10: 30
            Dear Sergey!
            Thank you for your articles.
            But I was asking specifically about “good options for finding allies” for the USSR in other parts of the long-suffering planet Earth!
            Andrey believes that after the Great Patriotic War it was necessary to adopt a policy of isolationism and not engage in the spread of "Marxism-Leninism" in other countries.
            And even in the same ways as the “Central Committee elders” from Moscow did in reality.
            1. +3
              29 January 2026 10: 39
              Quote: hohol95
              Andrey believes that after the Great Patriotic War it was necessary to adopt a policy of isolationism and not engage in the spread of "Marxism-Leninism" in other countries.
              And even in the same ways as the “Central Committee elders” from Moscow did in reality.

              I agree with Andrey on many things! Especially when huge sums of money were poured into openly cannibalistic African regimes, when their leaders declared they were "building socialism."
              1. +3
                29 January 2026 11: 10
                I agree with you in many ways!
                But going into complete isolation could have done just as much, if not more, harm.
                But these are already purely alternative arguments.
                1. +4
                  29 January 2026 11: 20
                  Quote: hohol95
                  But going into complete isolation could have done just as much, if not more, harm.

                  No one is talking about "complete isolation," but an excessive reliance on "international aid," the arms race, and ideological dogmas ultimately led to the collapse of a country that had considerable potential for development. The greatness of a power is determined not by its influence on corrupt regimes in other countries or whether it inspires fear, but by the well-being of its population. It's determined by how confident people are about the future and whether they want to have children.
                  1. 0
                    29 January 2026 11: 27
                    Reagan scared the "old men" with his "Star Wars"!
                    And again a lot of money went down the drain!
                    And the bases around the USSR greatly contributed to the "nervous tension" and the spending of money from the treasury on intensifying the arms race.
                    And let's not forget that the USSR and the Warsaw Pact countries were up against the world's largest economies (at that time).
                    USA, Great Britain, France, Germany, Japan.
                    What's done is done...
          2. +3
            29 January 2026 11: 23
            hi
            Good afternoon!
            IMHO, the year of removal in 1993 is still due to our poverty.
            As an ATGM, the Malyutka lacked a universal warhead. And the demands on the operator, of course, are very high.
            request
            1. +3
              29 January 2026 11: 32
              Quote: Wildcat
              IMHO, the year of removal in 1993 is still due to our poverty.

              In the second half of the 1980s, all portable "Malutkas" were transferred to our storage.
              Quote: Wildcat
              As an ATGM, the Malyutka lacked a universal warhead. And the demands on the operator, of course, are very high.

              The warhead on the ATGM was easily changed; if the military had wanted, they could have made it fragmentation or thermobaric. As for guidance, there was a semiautomatic version. But, if I remember correctly, only on the self-propelled version.
              1. -1
                3 February 2026 21: 28
                Quote: Bongo
                The warhead on the ATGM was easy to change; if the military had wanted to, they would have made it fragmentation or thermobaric.

                The "Malyutka" had a fragmentation warhead! Thermobaric warheads weren't "in fashion" at the time!
        2. -1
          29 January 2026 10: 32
          Was the Warsaw Pact also unnecessary?
          What then to do with the NATO bases (which proliferated en masse after the Great Patriotic War) on the borders of the USSR?
          1. +4
            29 January 2026 10: 50
            Quote: hohol95
            Was the Warsaw Pact also unnecessary?

            The creation of the Warsaw Pact was certainly justified. But, to be fair, it's worth remembering that the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance (CMEA) and interstate cooperation were quite effective. Eastern European countries that were part of the socialist bloc didn't have significant debts to the USSR and purchased most of their weapons rather than receiving them on credit, as happened, for example, to Egypt, Syria, and Iraq.
            Quote: hohol95
            What then to do with the NATO bases (which proliferated en masse after the Great Patriotic War) on the borders of the USSR?

            It depends on how you look at it. In the event of a full-scale global conflict, these bases wouldn't have been particularly significant. In a nuclear fire, everyone would have burned equally, with or without bases.
            The example of China is particularly telling here. From the 1950s to the 1980s, the PLA was vastly inferior in actual combat potential to the USSR and the US, and they could, if they so desired, quickly eliminate China's top military and political leadership along with most of its defense potential. But what then?
            No one was planning to attack either China or the USSR, because the negative consequences far outweighed the benefits. The Americans and the Republic of Korea still tolerate North Korea, even though they could have put the matter behind them long ago.
            1. +1
              29 January 2026 11: 18
              I absolutely agree, and the examples are obvious.
              good good
            2. 0
              29 January 2026 11: 20
              The example of China is particularly illustrative here. From the 1950s to the 1980s, the PLA was vastly inferior in actual combat potential to the USSR and the US, and they could, if they so desired, quickly eliminate China's top military and political leadership along with most of its defense potential. 

              For the US, this became irrelevant after the events on Damansky Island.
              And then the PRC began to turn into a "global factory of consumer goods" and the Yankees probably believed that the CPC would soon be "defeated" by the new Chinese corrupt Romanklatura and students looking towards the "Bright West".
              But Tiananmen Square buried their hopes!
              North Korea.
              They are probably afraid of great losses and simply want to wait until the country completely dies out!
              Even Bush Junior (or his Bush-Daddy) sent aircraft carrier groups to the shores of the DPRK and threatened war.
              And that's all.
              Those "maneuvers in the ocean-sea" did not end in anything.
              1. +1
                29 January 2026 11: 28
                Quote: hohol95
                For the US, this became irrelevant after the events on Damansky Island.

                And what about the USSR? Even frontline Soviet bombers could reach Beijing, and the nuclear capabilities of the USSR and China were incomparable.
                Quote: hohol95
                And then China began to turn into the "world's consumer goods factory"

                This happened in the second half of the 1990s. The Soviet Union no longer existed by then. I'm talking about the height of the Cold War.
                Quote: hohol95
                They are probably afraid of great losses and simply want to wait until the country completely dies out!

                They simply don't need it and, by and large, don't care. Until recently, the US and South Korea supplied North Korea with food and energy.
                Quote: hohol95
                Even Bush Junior (or his Bush-Daddy) sent aircraft carrier groups to the shores of the DPRK and threatened war.

                The DPRK does not have oil or any significant resources to change the regime in this country.
                1. -1
                  29 January 2026 11: 40
                  And what about the USSR? Even frontline Soviet bombers could reach Beijing, and the nuclear capabilities of the USSR and China were incomparable.


                  And the USSR, as during the war on Lake Khasan and the Khaokhin-Gol River.
                  Knock them out of their territory and that's it.
                  And the events on Damansky Island in some ways echo the events on Lake Khasan.
                  Hard to reach area from the USSR side.
                  Lack of good roads (which should have been built, but were “forgotten”).
                  Actions on the part of the Border Troops of the KGB of the USSR (Border Troops of the NKVD of the USSR) and a very sluggish reaction from the Ground Army (RKKA) until the shouts from Moscow.

                  We can "shake the air" as much as we want, but we can't turn back time!
                  1. -1
                    29 January 2026 11: 51
                    Quote: hohol95
                    And the events on Damansky Island in some ways echo the events on Lake Khasan.

                    The scale is absolutely incomparable. No.
                    Quote: hohol95
                    Lack of good roads (which should have been built, but were “forgotten”).

                    Are you saying the roads on the Chinese side were better back then? As the "First Socialist War" between Vietnam and China demonstrated, the PLA had no chance of even a local victory. No.
                    Quote: hohol95
                    We can "shake the air" as much as we want, but we can't turn back time!

                    It's right! Yes But we are obliged to comprehend what happened!
                    By the way, it’s a pity that we weren’t able to meet in St. Petersburg in August 2024.
                    1. 0
                      29 January 2026 12: 06
                      Hasan's scale only increased after Blucher's kicks from Moscow!

                      I can't say anything about the roads on Chinese territory.
                      I read that in the USSR, in that area, TWO roads were supposed to be built!
                      But ...
                      Ammunition was delivered to the border guards by horse-drawn sleighs from residents of a nearby collective farm. (If the information is wrong, then it's wrong.)
                      And the army "waited"...
                      And then she gave 3 T-62 tanks.
                      One of which is in a Chinese museum!
                      drinks
                      1. +2
                        29 January 2026 12: 10
                        Quote: hohol95
                        And then she gave 3 T-62 tanks.
                        One of which is in a Chinese museum!

                        My nephew even took a photo of this T-62 greeting visitors to the Museum of the Chinese Revolution in Beijing. I later wrote a review article about it. drinks
                      2. +3
                        29 January 2026 12: 14
                        drinks
                        I remember. There was an article!
                        drinks
                        I recently saw American cards, cigarette pack inserts, with drawings of the battles at Lake Khasan on someone's website.
                        An American perspective from the Japanese side!
                        Interesting pictures!
                        It turns out that cigarette pack inserts were very popular in the US at the time. They likely later migrated to chewing gum.
                2. +1
                  29 January 2026 11: 59
                  This happened in the second half of the 1990s. The Soviet Union no longer existed by then. I'm talking about the height of the Cold War.

                  Nixon flew to China in 1972!
                  And when a limited contingent of the SA entered the DRA, the PRC supplied the "dushmans" with weapons in no small amount.
                  This is not 1990!

                  The USSR had good ATGMs!
                  And this is the main point.
                  How and who disposed of them are other questions!
                  1. 0
                    29 January 2026 12: 01
                    Quote: hohol95
                    This is not 1990!

                    I'm talking about this:
                    Quote: hohol95
                    And then China began to turn into the "world's consumer goods factory"
                    1. -1
                      29 January 2026 12: 10
                      This is how it all started back in the 80s.
                      Not in one day.
                      It is clear.
                      But Yankee industrialists gradually began transferring production to China, injecting dollars into the country's economy.
                      Western Europeans began to follow suit.
                      It is likely that Chinese students began to be accepted to study at foreign universities at that time.
                      In the 80s of the 20th century.
  4. +5
    29 January 2026 07: 58
    Kudos to the author! Excellent coverage of the topic. hi
    1. +3
      29 January 2026 09: 55
      Quote: strannik1985
      Kudos to the author! Excellent coverage of the topic.

      Thanks for the kind words! drinks
  5. +5
    29 January 2026 12: 34
    As with the RPG-7 anti-tank grenade launcher, the main suppliers of anti-tank guided missile systems for the Israeli military were Egypt and Syria.

    smile
    Israeli, - I say, - militarist
    Known to the whole world!
    Like a mother, I say, and like a woman
    I demand them to answer!
    © Alexander Galich. A poem about how Klim Petrovich spoke at a peace rally.
  6. -1
    29 January 2026 13: 00
    Quote: Bongo
    The greatness of a nation is determined not by its influence on corrupt regimes in other countries or whether it inspires fear, but by the well-being of its population. How confident people are about the future and whether they want to have children.

    Which countries do you think are great right now? Is the United States a great country?
    1. +2
      29 January 2026 15: 20
      Quote: LuZappa
      Is the USA a great country?

      Are you a fan of the USA? That's very brave... lol
  7. -1
    29 January 2026 15: 35
    Quote: zyablik.olga
    Are you a fan of the USA? That's very brave...

    No, why would you say that? I simply named a likely candidate for the role of great country. No others came to mind...
    1. +2
      29 January 2026 16: 03
      Quote: LuZappa
      I simply named a likely candidate for the role of a great country. No others came to mind...

      Are you even writing from Russia? If so, it's kind of strange to read this... negative
  8. +1
    29 January 2026 16: 12
    Quote: zyablik.olga
    Are you even writing from Russia? If so, it's kind of strange to read this...

    From Russia. Why is it strange? A criterion for the greatness of a power is proposed:
    The greatness of a nation is determined not by its influence on corrupt regimes in other countries or whether it inspires fear, but by the well-being of its population. How confident people are about the future and whether they want to have children.

    We need to face the truth. Modern Russia is far from the world's best-off country in terms of population well-being. And I'm afraid not everyone here feels confident about the future. Having children is probably out of the question. I find this all extremely distressing. But recognizing the current situation is the first step toward improvement.

    I asked the author which country currently fits his definition of a great country. I offered an alternative. China seemed rather dubious in this regard.

    My opinion is this: such "greatness" will not exist for long without possessing "influence over corrupt regimes in other countries and whether you inspire fear"...

    PS: The article itself is very interesting, I read it with pleasure.
  9. 0
    5 February 2026 21: 50
    The Malyutka ATGMs inflicted heavy losses on Israeli armored vehicles during the Yom Kippur War.
    Even with active armor, in about 50% of hits the tanks received heavy damage or caught fire
    What kind of active armor are we talking about? If we're talking about explosive reactive armor, then it seems the first active armor system, the Blazer, was installed on Israeli tanks: the Centurion, M-60, and M-48, during the 1982 Lebanon War.