Military Review

Once again about sore, or ATGM and patriotism

270
Once again about sore, or ATGM and patriotism



Do you know the difference between a true patriot and a hurray-patriot? A patriotic cheer is laudable to praise everything that concerns his country, regardless of whether the subject of “praise” is a negative or positive phenomenon (“Our gopnik are the most gophnisty!”). A true patriot is not afraid to express criticism regarding certain aspects of life (in the broad sense) of his country, if these aspects are indeed problematic, and the coverage of these problems can, to some extent, contribute to solving them.

Personally, I never considered myself a patriot.

And now directly about sore. About ATGM, or rather, about the catastrophic situation with the models in service in Russia, and about our 20-year lag in this aspect from our “likely partners.” I understand that this is not the first article on this topic, however, in the presented material I will try to express a point of view that not only contradicts the hurray-patriotic position, but also takes into account the maximum possible number of aspects of the problem. All estimates given in this article are based on the use of exclusively open sources; All information is easily on the Internet if you wish.

Repetition - the mother of the doctrine, or again about the ATGM generations.

Before proceeding with the comparison of specific models of anti-tank systems, it is necessary to consider the issue of the generation of anti-tank systems, which are of fundamental importance for our material. In principle, about three (now, by the way, four) generations of ATGM are known to absolutely anyone, at least to some extent interested in the subject of modern armament of ground forces, but I’ll remind you briefly. ATGMs are divided according to the circuit diagram of the control system on the 4 type, which is commonly called the term "generation":

1. The first generation - ATGM with manual control of the flight path. Simply put, the operator with the help of a banal joystick fully controls the rocket's flight path. The main disadvantage is that a very high qualification of this operator is required, since one wrong move - and expensive ATGM will crash into the ground. Currently, the first generation of anti-tank systems are decommissioned in all developed countries.
2. The second generation - ATGM with a semi-active guidance system. The task of the operator is to retain the aiming mark on the target, and the aiming complex forms the trajectory of the flight independently. Compared to the first generation, the dignity is obvious - the operator does not need to move the joystick (not everyone can do it on a fairly masterly level), but simply look at the target through the sight.
3. The third generation - ATGW with the principle of "shot and forget." The task of the operator is to aim at the target, wait until its IR image is fixed by the SSN of the ATGM, click on the “Start” button and escape from the starting position (the last item is optional). The advantage is obvious - after the start-up, the operator does not need to be in the starting position, the ATGM will find the target that it has memorized.
4. The fourth generation - anti-burglary ATGM. So far, there is only one serial sample of ATGM of this type - the French MMR; to some extent, the Israeli Spike is capable of such tricks, although it is not specifically designed for this. The operator's task is to obtain information about the target for the PIC, to launch the ATGM, look at the variety of potential targets from the TV channel (view from the height of the ATGM flight), select an appropriate target from this variety and enjoy the spectacle. There are several advantages: the direct visibility of the target is not needed even during the guidance phase; you can adjust the flight of the rocket (or rather, choose the target); The combination of TV channel and IR channel provides high noise immunity.

So, dear readers of the material, you know, what's the catch of the situation with the development of promising areas of ATGM in modern Russia? That SUDDENLY we do not need ATGM more than the second generation. At least, in the opinion of those responsible for the formation of an order for R & D and conceptual programs for adopting new models. It is difficult to say who exactly is the carrier of such a strange view - representatives of the KB or the Ministry of Defense, as well as to comprehend their very strange argument.

The fact is that the third generation has a number of obvious and undeniable advantages over the second. We list the main ones.
1. For the use of ATGM 2-th generation, a necessary condition is the direct visibility of the target throughout the duration of the ATGM flight. That is, the ATGM operator after launching an ATGM is obliged to remain in its position (an ideal fixed target). The operator of the ATGM of the 3 generation can leave the position immediately after the launch, without waiting for the target to be defeated (and the arrival of a “response hello” from the crew of the vehicle for which the ATGM was launched).
2. The 2-th generation of ATGMs are resistant to optical interference just as much as the ATGM operator is resistant to them. The simplest smoke screen, fog, heavy rain or snow drastically reduces the chances of an 2-grade ATGM for hitting the target. The 3 th generation of ATGMs are resistant to optical interference as much as the IR-vision device integrated into the ATGM starting system and the GOS ATGM allows. That is, the smoke screen and other optical interference simply do not affect the accuracy of the 3 ATGM generation (which, like in the song “you can see everything from above” due to the specifics of the flight trajectory).
3. Anti-tank missiles 2-th generation "conducted" with the launcher. Destroy the launcher - means to interrupt the "maintenance" of ATGM to the target. The destruction of the same-generation PU-TGM of the 3-th generation does not affect the accuracy of the already launched ATGM, since he has his own gos.

We will try to penetrate the original logic of those individuals who still claim the superiority of the 2 generation of ATGM. Consider the main argument of the apologists of the 2 generation, proving that Metis ATGM and — especially the Competition — are more suitable for arming the Russian army than the potential 3 ATGM. Given that the 3 generation generation of ATGM is the “Javelin”, in this part of the material we will call the 3-generation ATGM “Conventional Javelin” and consider it to be a complete analog of the real Javelin.

The argument of the apologists of the second-generation ATGM will be given italic font, counterargument - the usual.

So, the dispute regarding generations.

1 argument. Second generation ATGMs have the ability to change the target after the launch, while the third ATGM is flying exactly to the selected target. The defeat of the selected goal at the time "after start-up" may already be impractical, because the target may already be hit by someone else during the flight of the ATGM, or a higher priority target may appear on the battlefield.
Counter argument 1. The speed of the ATGM flight is such that, in most cases, the attempt to re-guide will only lead to the fact that the ATGM leaves both the first and the second selected target. The range of distances at which the effective implementation of such a change of target is possible is extremely limited. We also do not forget that the field of view of the sight is somewhat narrower than the field of visibility of the naked eye, therefore, it will be difficult for the operator to search for some other target other than the chosen one. It is easier to work out the second start, which is also suitable for the 3 generation.

2 argument. An ATGM of the second generation is capable of working on a fixed target that does not have a contrasting IR signature, for example, a DOT. The third-generation ATGM cannot do that, because such targets are not captured by the GOS ATGM.
Counter argument 2. Not captured - and not necessary. Conditional Jvelin can work on a similar goal in the "grenade launcher" mode (without turning on the GOS), and the Conditional Spike does not know such a problem at all, because it has a duplicated control channel (if desired, the “Spike” can be operated manually according to the principle of the 2 generation). No one bothers to use two types of targeting on one launcher at once, which was successfully implemented by the Israelis. By the way, such a proposal was issued by the designers of the Cornet-D modification, but for some reason was rejected.

3 argument. ATGM 3-th generation requires time to prepare for the shot. GOS cools down the order of 30 seconds, and only after that you can “hammer” on it the IR signature of the target, which also takes a certain amount of time. Over these 30 + sec. the target may leave the visibility range of the ATGM operator. And this is in addition to the need to spend time on docking TPK with ATGM. In general, from target detection to launching an ATGM it takes up to a minute of time; however, the launch of the 2 th generation of ATGM can be carried out immediately after the target is detected.
Counter argument 3. There will be even two counter-arguments. First, the goal really can for 30 seconds. leave the field of view of the ATGM operator, but the 2 generation has no advantages here: the ATGM does not fly instantly, and, moreover, quite slowly. While he is flying, being controlled by the second-generation anti-tank missiles, the target can also leave the zone of visibility. As we remember, if the second-generation ATGM operator does not see the target, the ATGM will not hit this target (even if the operator has seen it before, but the 3-generation ATGM doesn’t have such a problem, the disappearance of the target from the operator’s view does not affect the guidance of the GOS ). That is, it makes no difference what to spend on 30 seconds for targeting, what to keep to the target: there is no advantage to the 2 generation ATGM. Secondly, it takes some time for the ATGM of the 2 generation to be brought into combat. Thus, it is in the armament of the Russian army ATGM "Metis-MNNXX" it is 1 seconds. (+ flight time to the target - to 20 seconds.), for the “Cornet” - about a minute (+ a few seconds to launch, + to 12 seconds to the flight). That is, in fact, the ATGM of the 10 generation does not have the advantage of operational efficiency (with the exception of the hypothetical situation, “already deployed, charged, waiting for the FIRST goal from a specific direction”).

4 argument. The cost of ATGM 3-th generation is much higher than the cost of ATGM 2-th generation, because IR-GOS - pleasure is quite expensive.
Counter argument 4. Again, there are two of them. First, the likelihood of hitting a target with a single launch of the ATGM of the 3 generation is still higher than that of any ATGM of the 2 generation. Therefore, when applying the ATGM of the 2 generation, not one but two or even three ATGM will be released according to the target; that is, more money will be spent on the defeat of one goal as a result, rather than using the 3 generation ATGM. The second: the probability of the destruction of the 2 generation by the enemy ATGM is higher than that of the 3, since The ATGM of the 2 generation is forced to remain in the line of sight of the target after the launch of the ATGM. The ATGW launcher itself, I remind you, is also worth the money, and even higher than the ATGM. I am silent about the fact that the life of the operator is a value to a somewhat greater extent than all these glands.

5 argument. The 2-generation ATGM is more anti-interference, because Now there are systems, "blinding" IR-GOS. Moreover, IK-GOS are known for the fact that they often “confuse” targets, suggesting other sources of heat on the battlefield.
Counter argument 5. Systems dazzling IR-GOS, currently have no special distribution in the ground forces - it is rather a "trick" of aircraft. As for the “re-capturing” of IK-GOS, I hasten to disappoint supporters of this version: GC Javelina does not look for sources of IR-radiation on the battlefield, but adjusts the ATGM course for the signature of a specific goal chosen by the ATGM operator. That is, there are no “other” sources of IR radiation for Javelin on the battlefield - only a specific target with a specific IR signature. The chip with shooting infrared traps, which works well against air defense missiles and air-to-air missiles, does not work here - unlike anti-aircraft missiles, the ATGM searches for not the most contrasting IR target, but a target with a specific IR signature. As for the “noise immunity” of the 2-generation ATGM - excuse me, the usual smoke screen reduces the effectiveness of any of them to zero.

Therefore, claims about the superiority of the ATGM of the 2 th generation over the ATTWS of the 3 th are, in fact, either a lie, or a deep delusion, or a conscious provocation and sabotage.

Javelin against ... whom?

For some reason, at present, a situation has arisen in which among sofa analysts (which, however, I myself am), when comparing the technical level and combat capabilities of weapons models, it is customary to compare not samples that are analogues of each other from different sides, but the most mass and "untwisted media" samples. In relation to our topics, i.e. ATGM, most often compare the American FGM-148 "Javelin" and our "Cornet". Such an approach is justified only from the point of view of comparing "top" (i.e., "according to the latest technology squeaking") samples, but it is not correct from the point of view of taking into account the tactical niche aspect of these samples.


FGM-148 Javelin.

For some reason, most sofa analysts forget that, in addition to the well-known criterion for classifying ATGM by generation, there is a criterion for classifying ATGM by tactical niche. You see, Javelin - this is an easy ATGM, in fact, weapon infantry level. For service and combat use of Javelina, it is enough to pay one person. The cornet is a heavy ATGM, and with all the desire it is not (in the portable, i.e. “easel”) weapon of the infantry unit. Do not believe it - try to place a full-fledged compartment with a machine gun, grenade launcher, sniper and Cornet’s calculation in the airborne unit of the BMP / BTR (which, among other things, unlike Javelina, it’s difficult to carry the 29 kg missile in TPC + 26 kg machine with scopes). So, if someone does not know, then our tactical counterpart of Javelina is not Cornet, but Metis-Metis, at least theoretically, can be served by one calculation number (although, of course, two bales at once - 17kg and 19kg - run across the battlefield for a long time to carry problematic ).

Therefore, if you compare Javelin with the Russian counterpart, then you need to compare it not with Cornet, but with Metis. Cornet himself is most likely comparable to his American classmate TOW (TOW-2), which is also a heavy ATGM installed both on equipment and on a portable tripod, in full analogy with his brother.


Cornet.

So, if the comparison of a “fly with a cutlet”, namely Javelina and Cornet, can somehow show at least the equality of the combat capabilities of these anti-tank systems (superiority in one parameter of one of them is “outweighed” by the superiority of the other in other parameters), comparison of Javelina and Metis is not at all in our favor ...

So, something about the "merits" of Cornet compared to Javelin.

1. The range of use of Cornet - 5500 m. Day and 3500 m. At night, and Javelina - 2500 m. At any time of the day.
Counter argument. In the European theater of operations, with rare exceptions (steppe), the visibility range of a tank-type target does not exceed 2000. Sense to create ATGW with a range of use in 5 km., If the tank with camouflage paint is not visible to the naked eye already from a distance of a kilometer? Especially nice in this regard is the assertion that some modifications of Cornet have more than a kilometer range in 8.

2. The armor penetration of Cornet is about 1300-1400 mm. for DZ, at Javelina - about 600-800mm.
Counter argument. Javelin attacks the target from above. In fact, it is enough armor penetration for DZ 200-250 mm for guaranteed destruction of any existing tankso with the available 600-800mm. Javelin has this indicator, excuse me, "with a margin." And here is 1400 mm. Cornet is no longer enough for guaranteed penetration of the forehead of the tower of Abrams in the modification M1A2 Sep v2 and Leopard in the modification 2A6, because Cornet can only attack in a straight line.

Sorry, no more merits. There are flaws, issued for the merits. Among such shortcomings there is so serious that I don’t even know in the Russian language an emotionally sufficiently capacious word to describe the mental abilities of the developers. Therefore, now there will be a small cry from the soul of the sofa analyst.

Dear designers of Instrument Design Bureau! I have a few questions for you.

1. Do you know what laser tag is? This is such a newfangled fun of office hamsters and others like them, which uses a “weapon” imitating a shot of a laser beam; at the same time, sensors are located on the “target” that pick up laser radiation and give a corresponding signal about the “defeat” of the target. Do you know how much such a sensor costs on any radio market? Take an interest at your leisure. And if you order in bulk from China - it is even cheaper.

2. Do you seriously think that our main potential partners, with their, for a moment, the first defense budget in the world in terms of volume, have no money to install wide-spectrum laser sensors on all armored vehicles? And at the same time and the simplest system, deploying the tower in the direction of the radiation source? And if there is at least minimal brains, also a system that tracks the launch point of the ATGM?

3. Do you seriously think that the phrase “a new woman gives birth to a soldier” is a guide to action when developing an ATGM guidance system?

4. THEN WHY (RIGHT, WHY), ON THE ROOT IT IS USED BY THE GUIDANCE SYSTEM WITH WHICH THE ROCKET IS BEHIND BY A LASER BEAM ???

And do not tell tales about "our pointing equipment keeps the beam at a distance of several meters above the target." Did everyone learn physics and math at school? In order to hold the beam (which, as is known, does not know how to bend) to keep it at a constant height relative to the target (and at the same time so that the aiming equipment knows exactly the moment when it is necessary to return the ATGM to the line of sight - otherwise it will fly over the target ), it is necessary to know the distance to this goal: we have a hypotenuse (emanating a beam from an ATGM sighting system), a short leg (height of the beam retaining over the target) and a long leg (distance to the target), we know the angle between the hypotenuse and the adjacent one ( long) leg m (as we ourselves are forming), is required to find out the length of the short leg; for this we need to know the length of the long leg (ie, the distance to the target). Does your equipment measure this distance? Optical rangefinder? Rope tape measure? Estimated "by eye"? I feel that after all a laser range finder, and then, excuse me, what’s the point in this “holding the beam over the target,” if the target is still irradiated?

Sincerely, couch analyst.

That is, the battle situation will look like this:
The calculation of the ATGM detects a tank, is aimed at the target, and launches. When a laser guidance system or a range finder is triggered, the enemy’s tank places a smoke screen (or goes beyond the nearest area fold), becoming visually unobserved for the ATGM operator. ATGM goes nowhere (- 60 thousand. $). And this is still a good option. The bad option: the tank catches the laser signal from the ATGM, locates the source of the signal and hits the ATGM with the calculation using the OFS (- 2 people, - the cost of the ATGM).

And now we will return to Metis. Given that, as previously indicated, Metis occupies the same tactical niche as Javelin, it is not unreasonable to compare their characteristics.

Javelin entered service in 1996. Metis - in 1978 (original version) with upgrades to 1992 (Metis-M) and 2016 (Metis-M1). Although Metis-M1 was developed much earlier, because for export he went back with 2004. That is, the Metis in the original version is much older than Javelina, and the modernization did not touch the principal guidance system.


Metis.

What advantages does Metis have in comparison with Javelin? So, a complete and exhaustive list of these advantages:

1. Price.

The list is over.

The use range of metis is 2000m. compared to 2500. at Javelina.

The accuracy of Metis' guidance depends solely on the directness of the hands of the operator, which is difficult to predict in combat conditions. Javelin is less demanding on this indicator.

The armor penetration of Metis in the modification "Metis-M1» - 950 mm. for DZ, which is not enough not only to defeat the frontal projection of the "Abrams" М1А2 Sep.V2, but also for older tanks. In fact, in confrontation with an army of a technically comparable adversary with Metisami, you can only work against light armored vehicles. Regarding the armor penetration of Javelina, I have already said earlier - given that he hits the roof, he has more than enough armor penetration.

I will not even give a comparison of the other characteristics, everything is very sad there.

In essence, the “Kornet”, that “Metis” are good, high-quality ATGMs. For 1980's. In a modern war, in confrontation with a technically comparable adversary - they simply cannot perform their direct functions. It is guaranteed to hit a “tank” target in any projection, regardless of weather conditions and time of day, with minimal expenditures on the materiel and with a guarantee of the survival of the calculation - this is not about Cornet and certainly not about Metis.

That is why we need to urgently develop and adopt the next, third or fourth generation of anti-tank systems. Otherwise (God forbid) we can see a repetition of the situation of the Crimean War 1853-54, when the technical superiority of the then NATO was the most obvious reason for our military defeat.
Author:
270 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Max_Bauder
    Max_Bauder 16 July 2016 12: 11
    +24
    I will only note that it is good that there is no "hap", we will listen to those who know the topic (if any) smile
    1. jjj
      jjj 16 July 2016 12: 14
      -15%
      The author suggests giving up or what? And he himself tried to shoot from all the described samples? Apparently all the same "laser tag"
      1. Andrey Yuryevich
        Andrey Yuryevich 16 July 2016 13: 26
        +37
        A true patriot is not afraid to criticize certain aspects of life (in the broad sense)
        but on this site, there are "cons" ... wassat
        1. Inok10
          Inok10 16 July 2016 14: 10
          +3
          Quote: Andrey Yurievich
          but on this site, there are "cons" ...

          ... and shovels off for the cause, that is, ball skimming ... for example, in addition to a huge amount of frank "water", for this:
          Author: So, something about the "merits" of Cornet compared to Javelin.
          1. The range of application of Cornet is 5500 m. In the afternoon and 3500 m. At night, and in Javelin - 2500 m. At any time of the day.
          Counter argument. At the European theater of operations, with rare exceptions (steppe), the visibility range of the “tank” type target does not exceed 2000m. It makes sense to create anti-tank systems with a range of 5 km, if the camouflage tank is not visible with the naked eye from a distance of a kilometer?
          ... isn't it nonsense? ... direct visibility in the mid-terrain is just 5-6 km. ... but the author considers the main argument ... unarmed gaze ... and, if you look with an armed gaze, through the scope? ... then you can see 1, 2, 3 and even 5 tanks ... do you feel where the "divorce" is? ... for the author:
          30A 2A42 automatic gun is designed to combat lightly armored targets at ranges up to 1500 m, ATGM installationsnot armored vehicles and enemy manpower at ranges up to 4000 mas well as air targets flying at low altitudes up to 2000 m with subsonic speeds and slant ranges up to 2500 m.
          ... all Javelin’s calculation ... a birch cross over the knoll ... Two morons with Javelin at a distance of 2 km., this is not power, these are two corpses ... laughing
          1. Lopatov
            Lopatov 16 July 2016 14: 14
            +19
            Quote: Inok10
            .. all the calculations of Javelin ... a birch cross over the knoll ... Two morons with Javelin at a distance of 2 km., this is not power, these are two corpses ...

            Not everything is so simple, dear ... "Javelin", unlike "Cornet", can be used from premises, bunker / bunker ...
            "Soft start" ...
            1. Inok10
              Inok10 16 July 2016 14: 35
              +3
              Quote: Spade
              Not everything is so simple, dear ... "Javelin", unlike "Cornet", can be used from premises, bunker / bunker ...
              "Soft start" ...

              ... is still simpler ... read for the old man T-72B3:
              The main armament of the tank is a 125 mm 2A45M-5 type cannon-launcher with 40 rounds of ammunition. The gun can use modern armor-piercing-cumulative and anti-caliber shells to hit targets at a distance 3000 meters and high-explosive fragmentation to destroy enemy fortifications and manpower at a distance of 4000 meters.
              ... will put the PF into the embrasure from a distance of 3000 m. ... and, the Javelin's crew will sit and wait for the "arrival", the handles are short, only 2,5 km. ... you don't even need to go to your grandmother for the result ... laughing
              1. Andrey Yuryevich
                Andrey Yuryevich 16 July 2016 14: 44
                +13
                Quote: Inok10
                will put the PF into the embrasure from a distance of 3000 m. ... and, the Javelin's crew will sit and wait for the "arrival", the handles are short, only 2,5 km. ... you don't even need to go to your grandmother for the result ...

                Amrazuru, first you need to find out, a couple of branches and horseradish. You will see her for 3km ......
                direct visibility on medium-rugged terrain is exactly 5-6 km.
                oh well ... are you talking about the desert, or what?
                1. Inok10
                  Inok10 16 July 2016 14: 56
                  +10
                  Quote: Andrey Yurievich
                  Amrazuru, first you need to find out, a couple of branches and horseradish. You will see her for 3km ......

                  ... jokes are dear? ... a couple of branches? ... Yeah ... Bunker (attached) ... Long-term firing point ... Bunker - Wood-earthen firing point ... more questions? ... laughing
                  Quote: Andrey Yurievich
                  oh well ... are you talking about the desert, or what?

                  ... in the steppe and desert, as well as on the sea, direct visibility up to 10000 m. ... based on ... On the spherical surface of the Earth, the curvature is 0,00007848 per kilometer (7,848 cm per kilometer). On the surface of a flattened ellipsoid, the curvature varies from 7,866 to 7,816 centimeters per kilometer ... the basics of geodesy and the concept of the accuracy of geodetic measurements ... Marne ask she will tell you, a lot of interesting ... hi
                  1. Inok10
                    Inok10 16 July 2016 14: 59
                    +3
                    P.S. .. the DOT does not cling in all its glory ... locally ... is that enough branches? ... or the branches will become unmasking sign, a firing point ... learn the basics of disguise ... hi
                    1. Andrey Yuryevich
                      Andrey Yuryevich 16 July 2016 15: 49
                      +6
                      Quote: Inok10
                      learn the basics of disguise.

                      this applies to you ... I have already said about the "couple of branches", and what will we see for 3 km? I can add a hundred more photos in "camouflage", but is it worth it?
                      1. Inok10
                        Inok10 16 July 2016 15: 59
                        +3
                        Quote: Andrey Yurievich
                        this applies to you ... I have already said about the "couple of branches", and what will we see for 3 km? I can add a hundred more photos in "camouflage", but is it worth it?

                        ... certainly worth it ... but what about aerial photography intelligence? ... no ? ... not provided? ... since WWII ... Yuryevich ... it is better to remain silent in this case ... or does everyone go in formation without reconnaissance of the terrain and enemy positions, as in 1812 ... formation for operation? ... even then the enemy’s positions were scouted ... and, You Friend Sitny about SD with bunkers ... they will be known even before the start of hostilities in this area, the bunker is not mobile ATGM calculation, but, they already spoke for it, but if they are in the bunker with Javelin, then these are mice in a tin can ... laughing
                      2. Vadim237
                        Vadim237 16 July 2016 18: 46
                        +5
                        All of these bunkers in modern warfare will come to an end - guided missiles and bombs with penetrating warheads - the bunker itself and everything below it will smash into smithereens.
                      3. Lopatov
                        Lopatov 16 July 2016 19: 36
                        0
                        Guided missiles and penetrating bombs destroy motorized infantry squads? Isn't it curly?
                      4. Vadim237
                        Vadim237 17 July 2016 00: 37
                        +1
                        The era of precision weapons - what to do, every year such ammunition in the arsenal of the countries of the world, more and more.
                      5. Nehist
                        Nehist 17 July 2016 15: 32
                        0
                        These highly accurate ammunition are suitable only for limited and local operations because it is expensive !!! in the case of a mass overload, it is easier to pull up a pair of batteries with three four B, K and level the terrain! Much cheaper and more efficient hi
                      6. Vadim237
                        Vadim237 17 July 2016 17: 19
                        +2
                        High-precision ammunition is suitable for all types of wars - it is quick and effective, but what will really be long and ineffective is the exhausting of guns and the consumption of thousands of ammunition in "milk".
                      7. Professor
                        Professor 18 July 2016 08: 15
                        -2
                        Quote: Nehist
                        These highly accurate ammunition are suitable only for limited and local operations because it is expensive !!! in the case of a mass overload, it is easier to pull up a pair of batteries with three four B, K and level the terrain! Much cheaper and more efficient

                        Yeah. For example Libya and Iraq. There "a couple of batteries with three or four B, K and leveled the area" or maybe there were smart bombs? wink
                      8. Vadim237
                        Vadim237 18 July 2016 10: 42
                        0
                        Smart bombs and missiles were there, after all.
      2. Andrey Yuryevich
        Andrey Yuryevich 16 July 2016 15: 44
        +3
        Quote: Inok10
        . more questions will be?

        will be ... on Vysheiu, pillbox-how in the palm of your hand? concrete, gray, huge, visible in the steppe, 3-5 km away, not masked ... yeah ... naivety ... there is no need for crazy geodetic layouts here, war teaches you to hide. this is visible on the globe "bulges". but on the ground - try to find at a distance, it's good to carry pseudo-scientific nonsense ...
        1. Inok10
          Inok10 16 July 2016 16: 01
          +2
          Quote: Andrey Yurievich
          good nonsense to carry nonscientific ....

          ... a fan of the theory of flat earth on three pillars? ... well, free, will ... laughing ...
        2. Vadim237
          Vadim237 16 July 2016 18: 49
          +2
          The pillboxes will find it by thermal radiation - the guys will "heat it up" inside it.
  • JD1979
    JD1979 16 July 2016 15: 02
    +6
    Inok10 - another sofa detective marshal.
    Quote: Inok10
    ... isn't it nonsense? ... the line of sight on medium-rugged terrain is just 5-6 km. ... but the author considers the main argument to be ... not with an armed gaze ... but if you look with an armed gaze, through the scope? ... then you can see 1, 2, 3 and even 5 tanks ... do you feel where the "divorce" is? ... for the author:


    Dear, go outside and look around. In central Russia and in the European theater of operations, you know, natural barriers to the propagation of radiation in the visible spectrum, in the form of trees, bushes, hills, ravines, are quite common, and artificial ones - there are all kinds of buildings (the area is mostly densely populated). And your 5-6 km are possible from a floor height of 10 and higher. Do you propose to plant calculations on the roofs of buildings? Weather? No, we don't know. In summer, okay pretty good. and other times - fogs, rains, snow are quite frequent occurrences. And where is your 5-6 km of visibility? And if you look with an "armed" gaze, you ... you can't fucking see at a distance of more than 1-1,5 km, except for the same bushes, trees and terrain. You are probably an expert in WoT, where the technique is outlined? Can you make out with your eyes a camouflaged tank under a special cape, which also reduces the IR signature, standing motionless in the bushes about three kilometers away? No, do not distinguish. And 1-2-3 ... 5 tanks will not rush across an open field without preliminary reconnaissance like a herd of sheep in your favorite VOT. So the author is absolutely right here. The actual distance of fire contact is often much less than the declared maximum range of ATGM systems. These 5-6 km can be attempted only in a certain type of terrain - steppes, desert, mountains (on opposite slopes).
    Quote: Inok10
    The 30A 2A42 automatic gun is designed to combat lightly armored targets at ranges up to 1500 m, ATGM systems, unarmored weapons and enemy manpower at ranges up to 4000 m, as well as air targets flying at low altitudes up to 2000 m with subsonic speeds and inclined range up to 2500 m.
    ... all the calculation of Javelin ... a birch cross over the knoll ... Two morons with Javelin at a distance of 2 km., this is not power, these are two corpses ...

    We return to our rams. How are you going to detect a camouflaged crew of 1-2 people from a light ATGM before launch? ; 4000m hand-face .... at this distance, taking into account the accuracy of our barrels and "sniper" shells, you won't hit an elephant, let alone a man. And they wrote to you, or did you see a fig? That the calculation of the 3rd generation complex, after launch, can screw up in the same second in any convenient direction. And so, as you put it, "Two morons", this is the calculation of the cornet, which will receive in 2-3 seconds after turning on the target illumination, in the forehead of the OFS with programmed detonation.
    Total, buy yourself Orbits, and follow the advice of advertising.
    1. Inok10
      Inok10 16 July 2016 15: 11
      +2
      Quote: JD1979
      And so, as you put it, "Two morons", this is the calculation of the cornet, which will receive in 2-3 seconds after turning on the target illumination, in the forehead of the OFS with programmable detonation.

      ... I saw everyone, but such "stoned" ... tell the tank gun with the range of the PF projectile with remote detonation at NATO with a range in 5 km. ... laughing
      Quote: JD1979
      Total, buy yourself Orbits, and follow the advice of advertising.

      ... go chew and do not let bubbles son, you slap your face ... hi
      1. JD1979
        JD1979 16 July 2016 15: 38
        +5
        Quote: Inok10
        ... I saw everyone, but such "stoned"

        Only you with your own 5 km, who was really quick here, explained to you on the fingers that shooting at such a distance is possible only at the firing range. Already with his spherical horse ...
        Quote: Inok10
        ... tell a tank cannon with a range of HE shell with remote detonation at NATO with a range of 5 km. ...

        You are really an alternative-gifted person ... write such idiocy and not burn with shame ...
        Nato main tank gun 120 mm Rheinmetall Rh-120 L55 do you know this? What about the DM11 shell? don't know too? so why open the mittens? Or out of a sense of superiority too lazy to get into Google to search? Distance up to 5 km is just his working.
        Quote: Inok10
        ... go chew and do not let bubbles son, you slap your face ...

        Dad, chew do not choke, and do not write garbage do not disgrace. Advertising is yours.
        1. Inok10
          Inok10 16 July 2016 16: 14
          +3
          Quote: JD1979
          Distance up to 5 km is just his working.

          ... ultimate shot ... dude, you're bored ... laughing
          Quote: JD1979
          Dad, chew do not choke, and do not write garbage do not disgrace. Advertising is yours.

          ... son, wipe your face, even smacked ... less need to watch advertising, read more ... laughing
    2. dakty
      dakty 16 July 2016 19: 28
      +3
      According to what you said: since childhood, and literally 3 days ago on the road I checked, despite 38 now, I see a column of a kilometer sign per kilometer on the straight road, sometimes two (morning or evening). This is by the way about the detection range of the tank (especially moving, smoking, dusting, and even with binoculars ...). On the other hand, I absolutely agree with you that it’s unrealistic to notice 2 motionless people in camouflage from a mobile tank !!!
      1. poquello
        poquello 16 July 2016 23: 08
        +1
        Quote: dakty
        On the other hand, I absolutely agree with you that it’s unrealistic to notice 2 motionless people in camouflage from a mobile tank !!!

        ))) and if you also bury them, then you can leave the RPG
    3. Nehist
      Nehist 17 July 2016 15: 35
      0
      You're right!!! In general, the actual distance is 1000-500 meters, and there will not help any kaz)))
    4. Uryukc
      Uryukc 17 July 2016 17: 02
      +2
      Cornet does not highlight the target, it highlights the rocket controlling its course. There is also a laser rangefinder, but they don’t need to shine in the equipment and can be side by side.
      So many things have been knocked out of TOW 2 and Cornet, why are people trying to refute the obvious?
      The infantry Cornet will cut any modern tank without a KAZ, the version for armored vehicles provides a salvo where two missiles go right in one beam to pass the KAZ (the first is intercepted, the second passes). In the future, more interesting solutions are possible within the framework of this complex.
      But no, give us the incredibly cool Javelin. To begin with, it is better to equip all armored vehicles and infantry with thermal imagers, and only then throw them into tanks. To pull the current "ingenious" technical solution (IC GOS); it is necessary not only to apply it, but also to squeeze out as much money as the "exceptional" ones squeeze out. One Javelin rocket costs ~ 50000 Baku, as a decent sidan, and a Cornet rocket ~ 10000, MO must think the budget is not rubber.
      1. Professor
        Professor 18 July 2016 08: 25
        -2
        Quote: Uryukc
        There is also a laser rangefinder, but they don’t need to shine in the equipment and can be side by side.

        There is no laser rangefinder, and Cornet does not need it. distance is set by eye.

        Quote: Uryukc
        One Javelin rocket costs ~ 50000 Baku, as a decent cidan, and the Cornet rocket ~ 10000,

        Cornet costs $ 40.

        Quote: Kite
        - no, he listed all the generations of ATGM at once and offered to catch up with the "competitors"

        He sucked the 4th generation out of his thumb. It doesn't exist yet. The 3rd generation is "point-fire-forget", the 4th "fire-forget-the missile will find the target itself and will aim itself."

        Quote: Lanista
        how the ATGM determines the moment of return to the aiming line is not clear. As I already wrote, most likely with the help of a laser range finder on PU, but then all these shamanistic dances with keeping the beam above the target are meaningless.

        The operator determines by eye and sets the range on the PU. EMNIP plus minus 1/2 km.
        1. Uryukc
          Uryukc 18 July 2016 14: 38
          +2
          For the Professor,
          As for the laser rangefinder, it is at least on the version for technology, possibly on new machines (I don’t know for sure):

          "The installation has a thermal imaging sight with a third-generation thermal imager and high-resolution television cameras; a built-in laser rangefinder and a laser missile guidance channel, as well as a target tracking machine with guidance drives."

          https://topwar.ru/53227-boevoy-robot-na-baze-avtomobilya-tigr-s-ptrk-kornet.html


          Regarding the price: I took the price information from a relatively old TV program, where the heroes of the article were compared. 40000 for one missile - well, maybe at current export prices (there is a price for MO), on the other hand, someone here wrote that the javelin is already at 120000, so the situation is about the same.
          Just in case, I’ll clarify that we are talking about missiles, not about the machine.

          And yet, if it does not bother you, a reference to the price of the cornet you are quoting.
          1. Professor
            Professor 18 July 2016 19: 47
            +1
            Quote: Uryukc
            As for the laser rangefinder, it is at least on the version for technology, possibly on new machines (I don’t know for sure):

            On the Cornet can put a laser rangefinder, but it is not needed there. Thus, the tank receives a warning about exposure. A laser rangefinder is also sometimes placed on the TOU.

            Quote: Uryukc
            And yet, if it does not bother you, a reference to the price of the cornet you are quoting.

            * Kornet-E (AT-14) ATGM: $ 875,000 for 1 launcher and 10 missiles - (based on recent Turkish buy)
            * Metis-M (AT-13) ATGM: ~ $ 500,000 for 1 launcher & 10 missiles - (based off unconfirmed data and inflaition compared to Kornet price)
            The price of Russian weapons info
            1. Uryukc
              Uryukc 20 July 2016 00: 10
              -1
              What are you stubborn))
              I agree about the machine, but the cornet also has a version for armored vehicles.
              Quote: Professor
              You can put a laser rangefinder on the Cornet, but it is not needed there.

              Well, I gave you a link and a photo in the previous post.
              Quote: Professor
              Thus the tank receives a warning about exposure

              Quote: Uryukc
              but they don’t need to shine in technology and can be side by side.


              Thank you for the link. I advise everyone to look.
              1. Professor
                Professor 20 July 2016 08: 34
                -1
                Quote: Uryukc
                but they don’t need to shine in technology and can be side by side.

                let's not fantasize. Either in the tank with a rangefinder, or by eye like on the Cornet.
              2. Uryukc
                Uryukc 20 July 2016 11: 37
                +1
                With the help of a range finder, they capture the range of descent to the final part of the trajectory, so that absolute accuracy is not needed. And such a fantasy will help to fulfill the combat mission.
                Cons I didn’t set you, if that.
              3. Professor
                Professor 20 July 2016 11: 43
                0
                Quote: Uryukc
                With the help of a range finder, they capture the range of descent to the final part of the trajectory, so that absolute accuracy is not needed. And such a fantasy will help to fulfill the combat mission.
                Cons I didn’t set you, if that.

                What does not suit you the current system?
              4. Uryukc
                Uryukc 20 July 2016 12: 31
                0
                So she stayed and suits me,
                but perhaps the developers decided not to rely on the human factor, but it would not have happened that the rocket would fall behind the target.
  • cyberhanter
    cyberhanter 16 July 2016 15: 53
    +6
    not nonsense. Do you often look through the scope? And do you think the enemy will arrange tank parades? :)) I often look through the replica of the collimatre sight in airsoft and even sitting in a comfortable position even seeing players from far away many meters before shooting (say, at a distance of 300 meters I rarely see them in the collimator’s window for several pieces. Do you know why? Because they not burdocks to run in droves and die in the first ambush by the whole crowd.
    Another problem is that most often all this is compared "in ideal conditions", but it is precisely the jvayelins that are more technologically advanced and just allow part of the required "ideal" conditions (such as line of sight or time for guiding the path) to be removed. This is the meaning so often important in a real war, especially now, when all combat actions will be conducted in urban areas
    1. tasey
      tasey 16 July 2016 17: 10
      0
      as I understand it, the Javelin operator does not need to see the target !?
      1. Aries
        Aries 16 July 2016 21: 54
        +6
        You misunderstood. Dzhevelin’s operator must accompany the target for 30 seconds through the sight, before receiving a command from the ICG of the missile’s missile, that it has captured the target and that it is possible to shoot at the target ...
    2. Uryukc
      Uryukc 17 July 2016 18: 54
      +1
      I often look at the screen))
      And yes, imagine, it happens like in a parade, judging by the vidos that the Internet is full of.

      https://vk.com/video-38574827_169700441

      The crew of the tank does not always see or hear that death is rushing towards it, and even if it sees, it will not always have time to react. The speed of anti-tank systems on average 400-700 km / h and sometimes more.
      The drawbacks of the 2nd generation are not yet supply to pay for missiles 5 times more expensive, especially at a time when they cut into the budget of the Moscow Region. To listen to all of you, it’s necessary to be naughty at tank tanks in general.
      Comparisons of airsoft experience and tank battle are just epic.
  • Forest
    Forest 16 July 2016 18: 06
    0
    5-6 km range except in the bare steppe. In other places everywhere there is a bush, a ditch, a grove that will hide the calculation or hide the shelled object.
  • Todessichel
    Todessichel 17 July 2016 12: 34
    +1
    The problem, it’s hilarious, is to find these 2x that, given that even if they are stupid people, they still want to live, they will certainly take care to be the least noticeable at the time of launch.
    In and try them in the green, and even on the go find.
    Do not grind nonsense.
  • cyberhanter
    cyberhanter 16 July 2016 15: 51
    +5
    49 pluses, 25 minuses ... it rakes off the minuses apparently from those who are classified as cheers of patriots, and I tend to agree with the author. I'm not sure that the author is right about everything, but I think in general, he still correctly illustrated the problem. In general, we have few new developments - all modernization. I don’t say that they do not exist, but we need to work in a wider spectrum. Comments and "pluses with minuses" are interesting from those versed in the topic, as Max_Bauder rightly said
    1. Uryukc
      Uryukc 18 July 2016 15: 13
      0
      For Cyber ​​Hunter

      "Comments and" pluses with minuses "are interesting from those versed in the topic."

      In this case, I'm sorry, but your comments do not creep into this category.
      This is a forum and not a military-industrial complex commission or a security council, you probably need to speak there personally with the general designers.

      A bit of good-natured irony, do not be offended.
  • meriem1
    meriem1 16 July 2016 13: 51
    -12%
    Quote: jjj
    The author suggests giving up or what? And he himself tried to shoot from all the described samples? Apparently all the same "laser tag"

    Particularly indicative is the phrase - "Personally, I ..." A head from a Chinese atomizer. Shit on everything, this is liberal patriatism! Sitting on your ass to find fault with everything in a circle. What education does "Affrar" have ????
    PS. For reference. Every schoolchild in Arab countries knows about the Abrams side projection. RPG-7 is easily hit. Therefore, the Americans are concerned about the release of a clone of this weapon. This is by the way!
    1. JD1979
      JD1979 16 July 2016 15: 09
      +6
      Quote: meriem1
      PS. For reference. Every schoolchild in Arab countries knows about the Abrams side projection. RPG-7 is easily hit. Therefore, the Americans are concerned about the release of a clone of this weapon. This is by the way!

      PS. every student knows that in the Arab countries they don’t understand what, whether the ATO or the help of these very terrorists and there is no need to destroy everything within the line of sight. And in our case, just don’t grab a heart attack, there will be a full-scale war, with a very probable cleansing of all life around the perimeter, so you are brave forward, dare to crawl a couple of hundred meters to Abrams’s side, at the same time grab a couple of shovels so that the NATO troops don’t search later.
    2. Forest
      Forest 16 July 2016 18: 09
      +1
      Any tank is hit in the side projection of the grenade launcher. And on Abrams there are DZ kits, which neither the T-90 nor the latest T-72 upgrades have.
      1. Aries
        Aries 16 July 2016 22: 36
        +1
        Lesnoy What thicket did you get out of? Since when is the T-72 and T-90 no DZ?
        1. Forest
          Forest 17 July 2016 15: 14
          0
          Find DZ on sides T-90 and T-72Б3 - the military will be delighted. NATO tanks do not need DZ tanks on the forehead - so reservation passive under 1,5 and homogenes against the COP is over the top.
      2. Krsk
        Krsk 16 July 2016 23: 57
        0
        I’ll save this koment ... strongly lol
        1. Forest
          Forest 18 July 2016 15: 41
          0
          Congratulations, I found another person who saw in the rubber fabric skirt DZ.
  • cyberhanter
    cyberhanter 16 July 2016 15: 49
    +3
    the commentator does not seem to have read it to the end, the author calls for work and the introduction of new anti-tank systems)
  • arane
    arane 16 July 2016 18: 15
    +17
    Quote: jjj
    The author suggests giving up or what? And he himself tried to shoot from all the described samples? Apparently all the same "laser tag"


    The author suggests reflecting why the British do not clean their guns with bricks ..
    (Hope everyone watched this cartoon)
  • Kite
    Kite 17 July 2016 22: 12
    +1
    Quote: jjj
    The author suggests giving up or what?

    - no, he listed all the generations of ATGM at once and offered to catch up with the "competitors" lol
    He generally forgot shock drone of a small type immediately after the first mention.
    Hehe! After the statement that the tank cannot be seen in the theater at a distance of more than 1 km, does it seem to make sense to continue developing ATGMs? What is it like?
    The main baldness in the argument - having already new benchmarks in technical solutions, it is proposed not to miss the sequence of developments by the enemy. winked
  • razmik72
    razmik72 16 July 2016 12: 27
    +23
    Quote: Max_Bauder
    I will only note that it is good that there is no "hap", we will listen to those who know the topic (if any) smile

    The recent April fighting in Karabakh showed the high efficiency of Israeli anti-tank Spike, they burned a lot of Armenian armored vehicles. Spike has a modification that hits 20 km, Spike has a more advanced anti-tank model than the same Javelin. It’s worth considering the release of such high-performance anti-tank systems .
    1. Maxom75
      Maxom75 16 July 2016 13: 38
      +17
      Ay me to the author another question. If our ATGMs are prepared for 20s, then another missile is guided and flies for 12 seconds, and Javelin cools the IR head for 30 seconds. and type equal conditions. And after cooling and launching a rocket from a javelin, does it instantly fall into the tank or does it also fly? The second question, did the author hear anything about a device that changes the IR signature on armored vehicles? And development makes sense which, with a different frequency, somewhere with a gap of 6-8 seconds, change the signature to 30-60 degrees. Those. the exhaust is cooled or exhausted without cooling. The temperature of 120 degrees was brought to the tank by an IR head, the signature changed and the rocket lost its target. In my opinion, the future lies with portable UAV strike complexes that will be launched from a distance of 10-20 km from the contact line and launch the rocket after they find it or the operator selects it. Well, this is not ATGM, but medium-sized UAVs and they are already being made. The cost is of great importance, but you can modify the cornet and remove the operator from the launcher by 30-40m. put a backup backlight station, since the cost of the laser is not high. 5-6 stations with a switching algorithm can completely drive any counteraction system crazy. And about the inefficiency of our ATGMs, tell the Saudis that the Yemenis have already burned dozens of sophisticated abrams by them. By the way, are the self-guided WPT cassettes used in our aircraft, what prevents them from being used on UAVs?
  • poquello
    poquello 16 July 2016 12: 36
    -1
    Quote: Max_Bauder
    I will only note that it is good that there is no "hap", we will listen to those who know the topic (if any) smile

    the arguments are crooked throughout the article, I read a third further through the line excuse me, I didn’t see there an extremely low rating of our experts on the work of javelin in the city, well, there are still five comments, it’s written beautifully
  • just exp
    just exp 16 July 2016 12: 36
    +14
    but why listen, you just need to develop your own, we had our own javelins back in the 93rd year.
    PTRK Autonomy, the series did not go, we all remember who was in power then.
    In the Tula Instrument Design Bureau in the mid-1990s, a small-sized portable third-generation ATGM "Autonomy" with an infrared homing system of type IIR (Imagine Infra-Red) was developed, the variant with a radar homing head was also worked out. This complex is actually an analogue of the American portable ATGM Javelin. In 1993, information was first issued on the Autonomy complex. The Autonomy complex combines the best characteristics of anti-tank grenade launchers with an uncontrolled grenade - simplicity of design, high noise immunity, implementation of the “shot-and-forget” principle and guided anti-tank missile systems - high probability of impact, powerful warhead. The complex ensures the defeat of tanks both with a direct hit and from above on the span through the use of different types of warheads. The missile control system has an angular stabilization autopilot with highly efficient gas-jet rudders interacting with a supersonic acceleration engine stream. The Autonomy complex passed tests, but was not brought to the level of mass production. CHARACTERISTICS The status of the proposal in 1993, in 2001 was under development Warhead (option 1): - type of tandem cumulative - weight, kg 5,2 Warhead (option 2): - type of type "shock core" - weight, kg 8,5 Warhead (option 3): - type high-explosive fragmentation - weight, kg 8,5 Method of destruction: - option 1 and 3 direct hit - option 2 from above on the span Control system autonomous and radar homing or infrared seeker Governing bodies gas-jet steering wheels Direct firing range, m 350 Average supersonic flight speed Assembled missile length, mm: - Option 1 1000-1050 - Option 2 and 3 1250 Max. case diameter, mm 152 Starting weight, kg: - option 1 10 - option 2 and 3 15 Engine type solid propellant solid propellant rocket engine Length of TPK (option 1), mm 1100 Weight of the complex in the combat position, kg: - option 1 14,5 - option 2 and 3 19,5
    1. Bayonet
      Bayonet 16 July 2016 15: 29
      +5
      Quote: just explo
      we had our javelins back in 93m

      At one time in Tula, a third-generation ATGM "Autonomy" was created with an infrared homing system, but it was never brought to the level of mass production.
      1. just exp
        just exp 16 July 2016 18: 14
        +5
        the first line in the selection says that Autonomy did not go into the series.
        and she passed the test.
        1. Basarev
          Basarev 16 July 2016 21: 08
          -8
          The secret is that it is intended. The authorities are not profitable for a large number of veterans of modern conflicts. After all, people with real combat experience and motivation will come back. You see, what is the threat of a quarter-century top-selling homeland? So they try so that not one returns. And therefore, they deliberately delay the development of weapons so that the enemy always bypasses us for two generations. And technical superiority is shut up in the old fashioned manner with mass heroism. And fill up with corpses. Will the soldiers only go to battle for the capital of the court rich? Personally, in such a situation, at least I will turn the weapon against the commanders. And even I’ll organize a tactical alliance with the enemy - let him rid the country of the parasitic elite, and then rid the homeland of the interventionist. In any case, I’m not like many notebook patriots - I never repaint. Always keep my line. I thought earlier, and I think now - only revolution can save Russia. There will be no reforms from above - on the contrary, the authorities are now striving to preserve the current situation with all their might - endure and pay until the end of time. The revolution and the subsequent civil war will be long and bloody, but only they will bring deliverance from these bloodsuckers. A couple of years of preventive executions will have an effect and will discourage all monsters from profiting at the expense of Russia.
          1. asiat_61
            asiat_61 17 July 2016 02: 37
            +2
            To dohtora, die temperature, pressure, well, and other head tests.
  • Skubudu
    Skubudu 17 July 2016 16: 37
    0
    Article plus.
    From shapkozakidatelstva about our "unparalleled" ATGM is already sick.
    Aiming a rocket on a laser beam is the last century.
    In the summer of 2014, there were many Cornet launches in the SG, but not a single tank was hit, KAZ Trophy of Jewish tanks Merkava 4 successfully intercepted the Kornet ATGM missiles. And in some cases, the tank turned the turret and destroyed the calculation of anti-tank systems.
    The ever-growing protection of the frontal projection of modern tanks makes the damaging effect of our ATGMs insufficient. There is no way to book a roof, our rockets should be able to hit a target in the roof
    The problem of the absence of anti-tank missiles of the 3rd generation in our army is
    Attack helicopters also need new fire-and-forget missiles like air
  • Teberii
    Teberii 16 July 2016 12: 11
    +5
    An interesting article, I hope the development of modern designs are also underway.
  • Khariton
    Khariton 16 July 2016 12: 12
    -32%
    Do you know how a true patriot differs from a cheer patriot? The patriot cheer is inclined to praise everything that concerns his country, regardless of whether the subject of “praise” is a negative or positive phenomenon (“Our gopniks are the most hopped!”). A true patriot is not afraid to criticize certain aspects of life (in the broad sense) of his country,

    Liberast praises everything Western ... And that’s it! Do not praise anything of ours (especially in Moscow ..))
    To humiliate Russia is your goal .. (at the beginning of the article, everything is clear)
    1. The comment was deleted.
      1. dauria
        dauria 16 July 2016 12: 42
        +13
        If you you think that criticizing your production and comparing it with foreign counterparts is a humiliation of Russia


        Still, your opponent refers to "you" ... You see, this is the way it is here. Do you agree with his opinion or not.

        Well, the pros and cons .... There is a sofa, there are training grounds, there are exercises, there are real military operations. There are people who are not blind. And modern technology sometimes changes not only tactics, but also throws whole types of weapons into the trash.
      2. vlad66
        vlad66 16 July 2016 12: 52
        +12
        Quote: LightPower
        The word "quilted jacket" is about people like you.

        It’s easier on the turns, dear, nobody seemed to offend you, well, if you consider yourself a liberal, then here you will see many quilted jackets and I, including, don’t agree with Hariton too, yelling slogans, not working with your hands and head, but to say that everything is bad with us, but with
        Quote: LightPower
        comparing it with foreign analogues

        For this, only "for" two hands. And colleague, constructive criticism is always welcome, and not indiscriminate criticism of everything Russian. hi
    2. JD1979
      JD1979 16 July 2016 15: 22
      +4
      Quote: Chariton
      Liberast praises everything Western ... And that’s it! Do not praise anything of ours (especially in Moscow ..))
      To humiliate Russia is your goal .. (at the beginning of the article, everything is clear)


      You know, your goal is to write and crap for your campaign. The author lucidly explained that nothing in the world lasts forever and the best 80s complications have naturally become obsolete in 30 years. While this topic was developing in the West, we preferred to sit on the priest exactly. But you didn’t understand the meaning of the article, from the word at all. A little more and KAZ will be massively placed on tanks, and most ATGMs will lose all meaning, and motionless crews sitting for 15-20 seconds in one place will be counted once. And what, you propose not to criticize sensibly, but to stick your head in the sand and then, in an emergency, try to catch up? Or maybe you yourself give birth to immediately ready ATGM operators as an initiative? Our soldiers will pay for the mistakes in planning the development of weapons complexes. Remember this. And then the campaign under the jamb you everywhere liberalists seem.
    3. The comment was deleted.
    4. Bayonet
      Bayonet 16 July 2016 15: 35
      -2
      Quote: Chariton
      Liberast praises everything western ...

      Here you have such an anti-tank tool, it will work like anti-liberal! wassat
  • Temples
    Temples 16 July 2016 12: 16
    +11
    Do you know how a true patriot differs from a cheer patriot? The patriot cheer is inclined to praise everything that concerns his country, regardless of whether the subject of “praise” is a negative or positive phenomenon (“Our gopniks are the most hopped!”). The true patriot ...

    Patriot is a man who loves his homeland. He loves his people, his language. Proud of its culture. He knows the history of his country. Proud of the achievements of his people.

    Hooray patriots - just a slang concept that appeared on the sites. First of all, it is used by snobs who consider themselves "more patriotic", "more correct" than others, daily inventing differences and praising themselves.
    1. Bayonet
      Bayonet 16 July 2016 18: 35
      +6
      Quote: Temples
      Patriot is a man who loves his homeland.

      A patriot is a person who loves his homeland, and does not hate everyone else.
      Quote: Temples
      Hurray patriots - just a slang term that appeared on sites.

      As for the cheers-patriots, they only speak and show their patriotism in words, but in fact they are very often aggressive and rude ...
      Leavened patriotism (also cheers-patriotism) is an ironic expression in the Russian language, denoting the unconditional praise of all that is ours, "ours." Contrasts with true patriotism ... hi
      1. Basarev
        Basarev 16 July 2016 21: 19
        +4
        This is precisely the main difference - the true patriot sees the shortcomings in the first place, because recognizing them is the first step towards eliminating them. I don’t consider myself a patriot at all - I still have to earn the love for my homeland. In the meantime, I see that there is nothing special to love: a citizen in ruin, a military man in ruin, I am partially in it too. And while all are happy with everything and do not want to change anything.
        1. asiat_61
          asiat_61 17 July 2016 02: 43
          +2
          You confuse the concepts: Homeland and state. This is what they say in Odessa, ..two big differences ...
          1. Basarev
            Basarev 17 July 2016 09: 57
            0
            Bad is the homeland who, at the direction of the state, voluntarily refuses changes for the better. As I have said more than once, justice is higher than the law, and power is higher than property.
  • svp67
    svp67 16 July 2016 12: 20
    +8
    What advantages does Metis have in comparison with Javelin? So, a complete and exhaustive list of these advantages:
    1. Price.

    As soon as the State starts paying the family of the deceased or the victim himself for the death or injury of a soldier, this “advantage” will not be given.
    And we shouldn't forget that the probable opponents OVERCOME in conventional weapons, which means that our weapons should be made almost according to Suvorov's principle: "not in numbers, but in quality." Moreover, the analogue of "Jewelin" in Russia has been developed and tested, but I expect from the designers a more modern and perfect ATGM, which they can create. Good luck to them in this matter.
    The life of a Russian soldier is the highest value, and he must have the best weapons on his equipment.
  • avg-mgn
    avg-mgn 16 July 2016 12: 28
    +2
    The author tried, though without much success, to open our eyes to obvious things. Attempts to compare w ... with a finger, contradictory, and sometimes mutually exclusive conclusions, only confuse the reader. In general, an article conceived as an analytical one failed miserably.
    1. Paranoid50
      Paranoid50 16 July 2016 21: 00
      +3
      Quote: avg-mgn
      The author tried, though without much success, to open our eyes to obvious things.

      Yes, colleague, that's the point that the author is trying to open the eyes of US (key word). There are no questions, the person does it with the best of intentions, but ... What the hell prevents the author from copying the article and sending it, so to speak, to its intended purpose: to the design bureau, to the manufacturing plants, and finally to Rogozin ?! After all, otherwise nothing, except for the next spread on the site, will happen. There were so many such articles, but it all came down to conversations in a virtual "kitchen". It's a good thing that we haven't learned how to virtually beat muzzles, otherwise the composition of the VO would change every month. Come on, author, bolder! You look, they will listen, in extreme cases they will send a refusal with justification. Or how? request
  • Monarchist
    Monarchist 16 July 2016 12: 37
    +4
    For me, the "teapot" article seemed reasoned. I would be in the place of the General Staff. I chose a compromise: 2 "korneta" ("mestizo") and 1 "Javelin" for example. And so we can wait for someone who is in the subject to respond
  • Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 16 July 2016 12: 38
    +12
    So, a comparison of "Javelin" and "Metis". My military specialty. Fired ATGMs of the 1st generation. With proper preparation, I dare to assure you - you can get into the tank from above and the escaper "for cover". Yes, we need exercise equipment and nerves of steel. But. There is no irradiation of the target tank, and let it "catch" the ammunition fired at it as much as it can. I can only compare with loitering ammunition. This is a COMPLETE weapon, and you shouldn't try to repeat Javelins. And the creation of loitering ammunition is not a function of the KBP. It is rather a UAV with a warhead. And other design bureaus are engaged in such devices. And we DON'T KNOW and SHOULD NOT KNOW what is being done in this direction. And the last thing. IMHO. We WILL NOT HAVE to fight off the "tank hordes" of NATO, due to their absence. Both tanks and tankers, capable of continuing to fight with losses of more than 10%. With the modern saturation of motorized riflemen with anti-tank weapons (BMP 3 per squad!), Not counting grenade launchers, rocket-propelled grenades and other things - to attack with tanks on the ENTRAED infantry is simply to leave the tanks in the infantry battle formations.
    1. svp67
      svp67 16 July 2016 12: 50
      -2
      Quote: Mountain Shooter
      We WILL NOT HAVE to fight off the "tank hordes" of NATO, due to their absence.

      Russia is inferior to NATO countries in the ratio of tanks in the European theater of operations 1 to 9, do you think a little? This is without taking into account other "armored" equipment
      1. Mountain shooter
        Mountain shooter 16 July 2016 13: 14
        +6
        There are not so many tanks in NATO! http://www.opoccuu.com/kolichestvo-tankov-v-armijah-mira.htm
        and in Europe there’s practically NO Amer’s tanks. And the rest can not be considered. Take Germany - they SIX times reduced the number of tanks in combat units. The rest are STORED. Where are the crews? Do not read the yellow press.
        By the way, in Ukropia there are also a bunch of tanks. Where are they? Storage bases are LOOPED, and in parts of combat-ready tanks - no more than 500! And those are out of date. And they train for a year, and half will RISE.
      2. berezin1987
        berezin1987 16 July 2016 13: 14
        +5
        Where you saw there is a ratio of 1 to 9. The Russian Federation is armed with 550 t-90 tanks, 3500 t-80 and about 9000 t-72. Of these, about 3 thousand in parts, another 10 TVs in reserve. In addition to them there is scrap metal t-55, t-62 and t-64 (about 2000). Europe on land has no advantage over tanks, there is an advantage in manpower, light wheeled armored vehicles. American equipment simply will not be delivered to a European TVD in case of war, now it’s not the 40 years. Only that which is already on the continent and will not fall under attack at the bases will fight.
        1. Vadim237
          Vadim237 16 July 2016 13: 55
          +2
          Against all this armored vehicles with outdated protection, they will fight with the help of ATGMs of the 3rd and 4th generation.
        2. svp67
          svp67 16 July 2016 17: 13
          +1
          Quote: Mountain Shooter
          There are not so many tanks in NATO!

          Quote: berezin1987
          Where you saw there is a 1 to 9 ratio

          Dear, I perfectly understand your indignation, but it is at the European theater of operations that we are now in complete failure. Since the bulk of the tanks we are located beyond the Urals. And in the event of a military conflict with NATO, the chances that we will be able to quickly build up our group are very few. Too many rivers along the way and relatively few bridges. That is precisely why the first guards tank is now being formed and forces are being deployed closer to the western border. Question who will be in time earlier. They are - to build up and deploy the entire infrastructure, for the reception of forces and means, or we.
    2. just exp
      just exp 16 July 2016 12: 54
      +2
      Javelin also does not irradiate with anything, he has an IR seeker.
      Javelin has the main drawback, like MANPADS. means such as Cape can greatly complicate the launch of the tank. while the theoretical one can still put heat traps on turntables. with control by wire, no traps will help. but there are facilities like Curtains.
      1. Mountain shooter
        Mountain shooter 16 July 2016 13: 15
        -2
        And Shtora works well against Javelins. But this is CLOSED information.
        1. Vadim237
          Vadim237 16 July 2016 13: 56
          +1
          We have already seen how "well" the Curtain works in Syria.
          1. just exp
            just exp 16 July 2016 18: 11
            -3
            works well. there was a video of how the rockets went aside.
            and among the T-90 losses are significantly less than other machines.
            and the Syrian analog of the Curtain Birdhouse works well, not a single piece of equipment with the Birdhouse is destroyed by the ATGM.
            1. Lopatov
              Lopatov 16 July 2016 19: 40
              +6
              The problem is that Shtora is like a beacon for Javelin. Much easier to hold.

              Well, according to the second-generation ATGM with optical coordinators, yes there, it can help.
      2. Vadim237
        Vadim237 16 July 2016 13: 57
        0
        And how many of these wraps in the army do not tell me?
        1. just exp
          just exp 16 July 2016 18: 10
          +1
          Do not publish this data. but there’s nothing particularly complicated and in case of war the output will at least be increased significantly.
  • corporal
    corporal 16 July 2016 12: 38
    +5
    I believe that the article is correct, the same questions about freezing on the 2nd generation I have long appeared.
    Undoubtedly + good
    1. berezin1987
      berezin1987 16 July 2016 13: 16
      +3
      I agree, an analogue of a javelin / spike is undoubtedly needed, but you should not refuse from the 2 generation ATGM. In the event of a war with a technically retarded enemy, you should not spend money on ultra-modern missiles.
      1. Bayonet
        Bayonet 16 July 2016 15: 44
        +1
        Quote: berezin1987
        but also from the 2nd generation ATGM should not be abandoned.

        Why refuse them? Riveted enough, let them lie for now. yes
  • Verdun
    Verdun 16 July 2016 12: 40
    +10
    The material of the article is ambiguous and cannot claim to be an exhaustive analysis of the use of ATGMs and the development of their new types. I can cite a few points as an example.
    1.Laser guidance does not always mean having a laser rangefinder on the launcher. It is quite enough to have such a guidance head on a rocket. The detection of an activated rocket does not mean the detection and defeat of PU.
    2. In a real battle, with the installation of a smoke curtain, radio interference, explosions, the effectiveness of laser and infrared guidance heads is greatly reduced. It does not provide complete reliability and radio command guidance. In this regard, a combined type of seeker is constantly being developed, in which several homing principles are used at once.
    3. In any case, the use of TOU-2 type ATGMs with a bulky control panel and remote control on a tripod is risky. Such systems should be mobile and be able to immediately change position after a shot. In this sense, Spike and Javelin, carried by one fighter, look much more preferable. But their weight is 26 and 22 kg, respectively, and this - without ammunition, is also not a gift. It is no accident that many Russian ATGMs are mounted on a mobile chassis.
    4. At short distances - up to 2 kilometers - the meaning of using ATGMs is not obvious, since at this distance the tank is hit by RPGs that do not have any homing systems. The cost of such weapons is much lower than ATGM. The main objective of ATGMs is firing at great distances, when it is impossible to defeat the target with simpler means.
    All of the above does not mean that it is not necessary to develop new types of ATGMs. You just need to really assess their capabilities and design new systems in accordance with the concept of their application.
    1. Muvka
      Muvka 16 July 2016 13: 06
      0
      The first time I don’t want to argue with you :)
      1. dvina71
        dvina71 16 July 2016 13: 26
        +7
        Quote: Muvka
        The first time I don’t want to argue with you :)

        I would argue .. RPG and 2 km? Where is this?
    2. Lopatov
      Lopatov 16 July 2016 13: 13
      +7
      Quote: Verdun
      At short distances - up to 2 kilometers - the meaning of using ATGMs is not obvious, since at this distance the tank is hit by RPGs that do not have any homing systems.

      RPG for one and a half kilometers? I do not know...
      1. Vadim237
        Vadim237 16 July 2016 13: 59
        +1
        RPG Carl Gustav M4 fires a 1000-meter rocket-propelled grenade.
        1. Lopatov
          Lopatov 16 July 2016 14: 07
          +3
          And LNG at 1300 So what?

          The probability of a tank defeat is still not so great as to refuse short-range anti-tank systems.
          1. Vadim237
            Vadim237 16 July 2016 14: 27
            0
            The probability of hitting a tank can increase computer sights for RPGs.
            1. Aries
              Aries 16 July 2016 22: 01
              0
              RPG and "computer sight" are incompatible things ... it's like putting parking sensors on a cart ...
              1. Vadim237
                Vadim237 17 July 2016 00: 54
                +1
                "RPG and" computer sight "are incompatible things ... it's like putting parking sensors on a cart." What do you mean - probably the German designers did not know about this when they created a computer sight for the Panzerfaust 3-IT-600 RPG - the guys combined the "incompatible"
                1. Aries
                  Aries 17 July 2016 07: 07
                  0
                  I do not deny that you can put parking sensors on the cart ... the benefits of this with gulkin ...
                  1. Vadim237
                    Vadim237 17 July 2016 12: 48
                    +1
                    And the benefit is substantial - the probability of hitting a moving target increases to 80 percent, and for stationary objects it is 100 - this sight essentially turns an RPG into a kind of ATGM - accordingly a shot to an RPG will be much cheaper than a guided missile.
        2. Aries
          Aries 16 July 2016 21: 59
          0
          It shoots for 1000 s and hits a tank, and even moving at a distance of 1000 m - as they said in Odessa, there are two big differences ... the same principle of "fire and forget", but what have you forgotten? What shot? Hit did not hit ... unknown ...
    3. berezin1987
      berezin1987 16 July 2016 13: 21
      +4
      RPGs are effective against tanks only at close range. What 2 km can we talk about? For the rest, I agree.
    4. Lt. Air Force stock
      Lt. Air Force stock 16 July 2016 13: 22
      +5
      Quote: Verdun
      At short distances - up to 2 kilometers - the meaning of using ATGMs is not obvious, since at this distance the tank is hit by RPGs

      An RPG can hit a target that is a few hundred meters from you. Try to hit a tank moving at high speed in 1,5 kilometers, you are unlikely to succeed.
      1. Verdun
        Verdun 16 July 2016 13: 36
        +5
        Quote: Lt. air force reserve

        An RPG can hit a target that is a few hundred meters from you. Try to hit a tank moving at high speed in 1,5 kilometers, you are unlikely to succeed.

        The range of a shot from an RPG depends on the ammunition used and the skill of the shooter. As one of my acquaintances grenade launcher said, "The RPG shooter is Robin Hood of the twentieth century." Even to hit the target at a distance of 300 m requires training. At the same time, he himself witnessed how his colleague from the RPG-27 flunked the helicopter.
      2. The comment was deleted.
      3. The comment was deleted.
  • red joni
    red joni 16 July 2016 12: 45
    -8
    haha laugh at the author; we have snipers from the Dragunov rifle squirrel in the eye fall in a strong wind and he thinks that professionals in our army from the ATGM will not get into the tank well and who is the patriot after that.
  • db1967
    db1967 16 July 2016 12: 49
    +1
    the enemy’s tank puts a curtain of smoke (or leaves behind the nearest terrain), becoming visually unobservable for the ATGM operator.


    And all this time, the Metis rocket flies God knows where laughing
    A half-breed on the maximum range flies 8-9sec.
    Cornet, by the way, has the same amount.
    1. Lt. Air Force stock
      Lt. Air Force stock 16 July 2016 13: 27
      +2
      Quote: db1967
      And all this time, the Metis rocket flies God knows where
      A half-breed on the maximum range flies 8-9sec.
      Cornet, by the way, has the same amount.

      Cornet, range 5500 meters, speed 240 meters per second. 5500/240 = 22 seconds. That is almost half a minute.
  • tyler2
    tyler2 16 July 2016 12: 54
    -3
    "In essence, both Kornet and Metis are good, high-quality ATGMs. For the 1980s. In modern warfare, when confronted with a technically comparable enemy, they are simply not capable of performing their direct functions." Article minus, no need to carry nonsense. Give you videos where the "bassoon" is pierced the forehead of the great Abrams? I released it and forgot, of course, it's not bad, but there are no so many disadvantages of complexes without this system, the arguments are fake. As an example, the visibility range in good weather is 20000 meters instead of 2000, the zero is lost and given as an argument, ugly. And do not forget that we live in a time when there are electronic warfare systems, how will ATGMs behave in such a situation and have they released and forgotten?
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. berezin1987
      berezin1987 16 July 2016 13: 26
      +5
      Are you talking about that video on YouTube? The Saudi Abrams did not get into the frontal projection, this is firstly, the preparation of the Saudis is secondly. In the oncoming battle, head-on or head-on defense is not very likely to destroy Abrams with a bassoon.
      1. tyler2
        tyler2 16 July 2016 13: 41
        +3
        Two Abrams were hit, the first missile hit the front of the tower at an angle, see carefully https://youtu.be/J0ROtMSblHQ, and the tanks were on the defensive. And the level of crew training does not matter when the tank is in place. The fact remains that the bassoon is far from Metis, much less Cornet.
    3. Lt. Air Force stock
      Lt. Air Force stock 16 July 2016 13: 28
      +2
      Quote: tyler2
      In modern warfare, when confronted with a technically comparable enemy, they are simply not capable of performing their direct functions. "

      Need ATGM with over-horizon firing range. Hermes was supposed to be, but for several years now there has been no information on him.
    4. Verdun
      Verdun 16 July 2016 13: 41
      +2
      Quote: tyler2
      As an example, the visibility range in good weather is 20000 meters and not 2000, they lost the toe and passed it off as an argument, ugly

      And it's nothing that even on the sea to the horizon line of 8 km?)) Now, if you're talking about air-to-surface missiles, then yes!
      1. Lopatov
        Lopatov 16 July 2016 13: 52
        0
        Quote: Verdun
        And it's nothing that even on the sea to the horizon line of 8 km?))

        This does not at all prevent the appearance of such complexes.
      2. poquello
        poquello 16 July 2016 22: 40
        +1
        Quote: Verdun
        Quote: tyler2
        As an example, the visibility range in good weather is 20000 meters and not 2000, they lost the toe and passed it off as an argument, ugly

        And it's nothing that even on the sea to the horizon line of 8 km?)) Now, if you're talking about air-to-surface missiles, then yes!

        but nothing on the line?)) 20km is 8m lift
    5. Vadim237
      Vadim237 16 July 2016 14: 01
      0
      Unless in the partisan detachments, the war in Syria demonstrated this.
  • Aries
    Aries 16 July 2016 12: 55
    +11
    1. The author of the article does not know the performance characteristics of either our complexes, nor those with which he compares.
    2. If the author claims to be somewhat scientific in the article, then the use of the terms "faster", "slower", "rather long" is not acceptable
    .
    3. It would not hurt the author to compare ATGM on an equal footing.
    4. Most of the author's "counterarguments" can be easily defeated by counter arguments.
    5. The developers of Jewelin have recognized the inferiority of his control system and are going to change it to "shoot-observe-correct".
    6. The ICG seeker has much more shortcomings than the author knows.
    7. Well, and on trifles - ATGM 2 generations are not semi-active, but semi-automatic guidance.
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 16 July 2016 13: 12
      +2
      Quote: Aries
      Well, on the little things - the ATGM of the 2nd generation is not semi-active, but semi-automatic guidance.

      ?
      ATGM with a semi-active laser "head" of the "Helfair" type also belong to the second generation.
      1. Aries
        Aries 16 July 2016 13: 21
        +1
        The author confused the terms, describes semi-automatic guidance, and calls it semi-active ...
        1. Lopatov
          Lopatov 16 July 2016 13: 36
          0
          Well, the fact that the author has gaps in his knowledge of the "materiel" is, of course, a fact.

          But on the other hand, his attempt to resist the appointment of "Cornet", and even more so "Metis" by a certain wunderwaffe is worthy of praise. Indeed, raw complexes in any of their incarnations.
      2. Vadim237
        Vadim237 16 July 2016 14: 03
        0
        ATGM "Helfair" will soon be replaced with a new universal missile fired and forgotten.
  • Neputin
    Neputin 16 July 2016 12: 56
    +13
    I agree. In any case, for a person who did not shoot either from the "Metis" or from the "Javelin" the advantages and disadvantages are presented logically, the criticism of the identified shortcomings is well-reasoned. Well, you will not argue that 5 is more than 3. Perhaps there is an element of guile and the author did not indicate the possible advantages of domestic complexes. For this, there is a discussion with knowledgeable people. And to throw "labels" that the author is not a patriot, liberalist, etc. is, excuse me, voluntarism. Do not do like this. If you have a different opinion - state it with reason and you will be respected and honored on the site. No - "shut up the fountain" and listen to what knowledgeable people have to say. Something like this.
  • kov123
    kov123 16 July 2016 12: 58
    +5
    Again one on one comparisons.
    ATGM ATGM, ATGM on the tank.
    And if you look at everything in the dynamics of modern combat, in regular and non-standard applications, etc.
    Again, the visibility range on the European theater of operations is 2000 m. For a tank or TVET, it’s important. And what prevents PU from entering the 2nd or 3rd floor of any building? And what on the battlefield is only an anti-tank launcher with a laser signal? Or all the same, laser rangefinders, sights, simulators work ... The instructed operator at a long range will set the sighting mark above the target, and after starting it will smoothly turn on the target. The target will have no response time to the answer.
    On the battlefield, a bunch of tanks that are hiding from one PU? or is there some kind of density of anti-tank defense, and the tank commander needs to turn his head-devices-tower to understand where to get banged? And if the visibility range of 2000 m how to shoot at 20 km?
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 16 July 2016 13: 09
      -1
      Quote: kov123
      The target will have no response time to the answer.

      Be.
      Aerosol curtain, shot.
      1. Aries
        Aries 16 July 2016 13: 25
        +1
        How far does the tank in the smokescreen shift in 2-3 seconds? And where is the shot, if the curtain is high? And do not forget to compare the dimensions of the tank and the dimensions of the calculation of the ATGM ... which I would say problematic to get into from 1 shot ...
        1. Lopatov
          Lopatov 16 July 2016 13: 43
          +2
          Why "2-3 seconds"?

          Quote: Aries
          And where is the shot, if the curtain is high?

          By coordinates. Modern SLA allows this. There are PU coordinates, the current coordinates of the tank and the current directional axis of the tank are. Why not hit on some remote fuse shell? PU is not a tank, a pair of fragments for the eyes is enough.
          1. Aries
            Aries 16 July 2016 14: 17
            0
            Those. no time for the introduction of all the shooting installations you listed is required?
            1. Lopatov
              Lopatov 16 July 2016 16: 25
              +1
              With normal SLA, a split second.
              1. Aries
                Aries 16 July 2016 22: 04
                +2
                Well, when you find such an OMS that in a split second will provide you with a calculation of the firing settings so that from the first shot you hit the ATGM calculation for 5 km ... then we'll discuss it, but for now .. the ATGM has an advantage on the battlefield ...
        2. Vadim237
          Vadim237 16 July 2016 14: 07
          0
          The GOS in the ultraviolet range recognizes the silhouette of the tank in the aerosol curtain.
          1. dvina71
            dvina71 16 July 2016 14: 47
            0
            Quote: Vadim237
            ultraviolet range

            The source of UV on earth is the sun. So you can forget about night shooting with such a seeker. In addition, UV is highly dependent on the position of the sun, cloud cover, dust and finally the coating from which it is reflected.
            Isn't it too much if, for the wunderwaffe?
            1. Vadim237
              Vadim237 16 July 2016 15: 34
              +1
              They will make a dual-channel GOS ultraviolet plus IR.
            2. Lopatov
              Lopatov 16 July 2016 16: 28
              0
              In fact, it is considered the opposite. And that is why the UV range is used to warn about the launch of a rocket. In aviation systems, and now on land. In the UV range, there is less natural interference.
    2. The comment was deleted.
  • RDX
    RDX 16 July 2016 13: 03
    -3
    With the same success one can compare rifles / machine guns of the USA and the Russian Federation, there is such a concept as "unpretentiousness, manufacturability of production" for use in a combat situation, however, everyone prefers AK, or, for example, take German tanks from the Great Patriotic War and domestic ones, when when the Germans were defeated, the Germans loaded their own and sent them by railway, and ours were repaired in the field, but what can I say, if the German's rollers froze, turning into a pile of metal, and yes, their tanks were better))) And it seems to me that in modern conditions military conflicts, electronic warfare comes to the fore, one powerful email. impulse, will display all email. the filling of such shells and guidance systems of the "javelin" type, the simpler, the more reliable, this is my purely personal opinion.
  • Lopatov
    Lopatov 16 July 2016 13: 04
    +1
    Not everything is so simple ...
    No, of course I am not at all against the postulates "ATGM are in our paddock" and "We need a third-generation ATGM".

    But the fact is that abandoning the second generation is clearly early. And even super-rich Americans do not. Moreover, the second generation still has enormous reserves of modernization.

    For example, at the moment only the second-generation ATGMs have the ability to overcome KAZ
    1. atalef
      atalef 16 July 2016 13: 10
      +4
      Quote: Spade
      For example, at the moment only the second-generation ATGMs have the ability to overcome KAZ

      Classification Cornet belongs to 2 + (generation)
      Interception of KAZ ATGM Cornet
      1. Lopatov
        Lopatov 16 July 2016 13: 22
        +3
        Quote: atalef
        Classification Cornet belongs to 2 + (generation)

        Generation 2+ is an "invention" of advertisers from Tula KB 8))))))
        In real life, such a generation does not exist. This is not aviation and other areas with their blurry generations, everything is extremely accurate here.

        Guided by two points? Yes. So the second generation. Without any pluses.

        Second-generation ATGMs can overcome KAZ in two ways. Overloading it - that is, launching two or more missiles at one target from one or several closely located launchers.
        Or overcoming KAZ due to high speed, like American hypersonic CKEM
        1. atalef
          atalef 16 July 2016 13: 27
          +3
          Quote: Spade
          Generation 2+ is an "invention" of advertisers from Tula KB 8))))))

          winked
          Currently, the armies of many countries are actively moving from the ATGM, belonging to the 2 generation (semi-automatic aiming at the target), to the third-generation complexes, which are based on the principle of "shot-and-forget". In the latter case, the operator of this complex can only aim and carry out the launch of the rocket, then - change the position. As a result, the market for modern anti-tank systems was actually divided between American and Israeli defenders. The Russian sales leader, Kornet, according to the Western classification, belongs to the 2 + generation of anti-tank systems.

          Quote: Spade
          Second-generation ATGMs can overcome KAZ in two ways. Overloading it - that is, launching two or more missiles at one target from one or several closely located launchers.

          Thus, it can be hit by the direct generation. Imagine a simultaneous shot of 20-ty RPGs from close range laughing
          Quote: Spade
          Or overcoming KAZ due to high speed, like American hypersonic CKEM

          Do you know TTX KAZ? Why so sure?
          1. Lopatov
            Lopatov 16 July 2016 13: 47
            0
            Quote: atalef
            Thus, it can be hit by the direct generation.

            I don’t think it will be possible to adjust their trajectory so much ...

            Even if it will be 4 "Kornetov" missiles, one "Merkava", it is cheaper than a Tank. And cheaper "Spike", which KAZ cannot overcome.

            Quote: atalef
            Do you know TTX KAZ? Why so sure?

            Confidence is associated with the fact that these missiles have a higher speed than a sub-caliber projectile.
            In addition, nothing prevents it from crashing with two missiles.
            1. atalef
              atalef 16 July 2016 13: 50
              0
              Quote: Spade
              I don’t think that it will be possible to adjust their trajectory so much ..

              What for ? 20 from different points and close range wink
              Quote: Spade
              Even if it will be 4 "Kornetov" missiles, one "Merkava", it is cheaper than a Tank.

              A tank with a capital letter? Artillerymen will not like it laughing
              Quote: Spade
              Confidence is associated with the fact that these missiles have a higher speed than a sub-caliber projectile.

              and?
              Again the question, what is there with the TTX KAZ?
              1. Lopatov
                Lopatov 16 July 2016 14: 01
                0
                Quote: atalef
                What for ? 20 from different points and close range

                And you, my friend, do you know what a first generation ATGM is? Commenting again without reading the article itself?
          2. Genry
            Genry 16 July 2016 14: 54
            +2
            Quote: atalef
            Quote: Spade
            Second-generation ATGMs can overcome KAZ in two ways. Overloading it - that is, launching two or more missiles at one target from one or several closely located launchers.

            Thus, it can be hit by the direct generation. Imagine a simultaneous shot of 20 RPGs at close range laughing

            You are laughing in vain!
            Kornet ATGM missiles can fly in pairs, along one laser track. How long does it take to recharge the KAZ?
        2. Aries
          Aries 17 July 2016 07: 11
          +1
          "Generation 2+" is an "invention" of advertisers from Tula KB
          You are right, but in part, 2+ means that the Cornet is better than the classic 2nd generation ATGMs - it cannot be interfered with, like the Competition or the competition ... so this is not only an advertising move ...
      2. dvina71
        dvina71 16 July 2016 13: 38
        0
        Quote: atalef
        Interception of KAZ ATGM Cornet


        And how did you determine that it was hit by a cornet?
        He flew and shouted - I am a corner, am I a cornet?
        1. atalef
          atalef 16 July 2016 13: 51
          0
          Quote: dvina71
          And how did you determine that it was hit by a cornet?
          He flew and shouted - I am a corner, am I a cornet?

          The trajectory shows that this is the second generation.
          1. dvina71
            dvina71 16 July 2016 14: 03
            +1
            Quote: atalef
            The trajectory shows that this is the second generation.

            And you can determine the sex of the fetus by the shape of the belly of a pregnant woman?
            1. Bayonet
              Bayonet 16 July 2016 15: 57
              +1
              Quote: dvina71
              And you can determine the sex of the fetus by the shape of the belly of a pregnant woman?

              Easy! If the stomach is high - man. He sits his head propped, thinking where to take a bubble! If low - the girl fell apart, one hundred pounds!
              At least one of my late relatives was defined as such. laughing
            2. poquello
              poquello 16 July 2016 23: 42
              +1
              Quote: dvina71
              Quote: atalef
              The trajectory shows that this is the second generation.

              And you can determine the sex of the fetus by the shape of the belly of a pregnant woman?

              +))) judging by the ears and eggs of this hare 300 years
          2. Banishing liberoids
            Banishing liberoids 16 July 2016 14: 18
            0
            Atalef - I've watched this video before, I'm sure it's a "competition" and not a "cornet"!
        2. Lopatov
          Lopatov 16 July 2016 14: 02
          +2
          He is from Israel. There "Cornet" is a common name for all anti-tank weapons, including the grenade launcher. 8))))))))))))))))))
        3. Professor
          Professor 16 July 2016 15: 02
          +3
          Quote: dvina71
          And how did you determine that it was hit by a cornet?
          He flew and shouted - I am a corner, am I a cornet?

          1. They and the children stated that it was Cornet.
          2. The evil Zionists collected the debris, conducted an investigation, and claimed that it was Cornet.

          PS
          I read the article before the definition of the fourth generation and decided not to read further. Gave the author a second chance, but after reading to The second generation ATGMs have the ability to change targets after launch, while the third ATGMs fly exactly at the chosen target did not read further.
          1. poquello
            poquello 16 July 2016 23: 46
            0
            Quote: Professor
            The evil Zionists collected the wreckage, conducted an investigation, and claimed it was Cornet.

            in in and Boeing they shot down
  • Banishing liberoids
    Banishing liberoids 16 July 2016 13: 07
    0
    I simply advise the author to send this material to the Defense Ministry, the General Staff, and to all design bureaus dealing with similar topics. And wait, from the sea of ​​weather fool
    1. Aries
      Aries 16 July 2016 13: 27
      +2
      Yeah, so that there and there neighing at the beginning of the week ... to raise the mood, so to speak ...
  • The comment was deleted.
  • prior
    prior 16 July 2016 13: 26
    0
    Anyway, our trains are the most traveled trains!
    They ride themselves along the train roads of our train homeland.

    To become targets of our ATGMs, their Abrams still need to swim or fly over the oceans.
    While they are sailing - and the star-striped homeland is already gone!
    And we have already counted those in the Baltic states ...
  • your1970
    your1970 16 July 2016 13: 28
    +4
    "In modern warfare, when confronted with a technically comparable opponent - they are simply not capable of performing their direct functions. It is guaranteed to hit the target of the "tank" type in any projection, regardless of weather conditions and time of day, with minimal costs for materiel and with a guarantee of the survival of the calculation "- here a number of answers to the author's questions arise:
    1) "with a technically comparable enemy" - translated into Russian, this is the United States, NATO, China. In this case, there will be NO tank attacks (from the word AT ALL!) - since there will be an exchange of full-fledged strikes of nuclear weapons, than, in fact, everything public war and end (maybe forever). Nuclear winter .... Someone doubt ??
    2) "with a technically NOT comparable enemy" is exactly the same. Who is in their right mind from the weak will go to the Russian Federation tanks??
    3) ATGMs - currently produced by manufacturers to combat Russian tanks for THIRD COUNTRIES.Vtyuhivaniya technologies remained from the times of the USSR- "The terrible Russian Federation will come and attack you !!!!! UUUUUUUU !!!!" + bribery of state persons / military + driving over the ears of citizens + general possible instability / nervousness.
    4) We deliver our ATGMs mainly to third countries. Does it make sense to supply these countries with: a) weapons that are too powerful, b) too expensive (they are mostly Holodians), c) leaks to the side are possible.
    5) Cost - already prohibitive for almost all countries of the world
    6) Panic - "TANKS !!!!!!". And what about tanks ?? What about tanks WITHOUT the support of infantry and aviation? That's right - zero without a stick. Even the experience of the Second World War does not need to be attracted - modern up to the ears: 1-Chechen (Grozny ), Iraq, Syria and other places, where the TANKS remaining WITHOUT infantry cover burned / burn such garbage belay , including gas cans, and RPGs are so holy.
    7) The main thing is that the Russian Federation is not going to attack anyone. In this regard, no foreign ATGMs pose a threat to OUR tanks in OUR territory, see paragraph 1. And if suddenly (well, you never know, the Baltic states will rush suddenly) without nuclear weapons troops comprehensively (aviation, tanks, artillery, infantry), I hope they will fight repeat including the liquidation of fuel and lubricant depots, without which no tanks can go further than 100 km inland of the Russian Federation.

    Z.Y. I’ll immediately note (for minusers) -I am NOT against the development of new complexes -I am FOR the development of new principles of defeat, simplification and cheapening while increasing efficiency.
    For some reason, there is a feeling (though not supported by statistics, alas, there is no such) - that most of all TANKS in their entire history have suffered from banal "Molotov cocktails" + RPG
    1. dvina71
      dvina71 16 July 2016 14: 01
      +1
      Quote: your1970
      Nuclear winter..

      Absolutely not a fact. People have truly immeasurable conceit ..
      I remind you .. All the energy consumption of mankind in a year, about 1% of absorbed solar radiation in 1 day.
      It is solar radiation that creates the climate on Earth, and even multi-day volcanic eruptions that emit a huge amount of heat and ash. They can change the climate in a small area of ​​the Earth, not much and not for long.
      But undoubtedly ... a nuclear attack will lead to numerous victims and destruction. Moreover, the victims will be associated with nuclear weapons indirectly. Panic, subsequent hunger, malnutrition, epidemics.
      1. your1970
        your1970 16 July 2016 15: 49
        +1
        that is, the effects of burning oil depots / gas tanks / drilling / gas stations / military depots of fuels and lubricants / oil refineries on sunlight are completely excluded (for example, wells in Iraq burned for a year, for example) ???
        turning off the Crimea caused so many emotions from all sides (given that the light was albeit intermittent) -and you imagine that this is all and forever at all-NO GENERAL ELECTRIC POWER ...
        1. dvina71
          dvina71 16 July 2016 16: 29
          0
          Quote: your1970
          i.e. the effects of burning oil depots / gas tanks / drilling / gas stations / military fuel and lubricant storage facilities

          What makes you think that all this will burn?
          Why didn't Herosima and Nagasaki completely burn out? But it’s full of destruction .. almost to the bottom. But they were more than half of low-burning and flammable materials.
          Patamuchto -
          The damaging factors of YV. (In order of exposure)
          1. Radiations of various types (including those that cause fires)
          2. The blast wave (the main damaging factor .. is it strange after all?)
          3. A sharp drop in pressure. A strong vacuum (who fell under the first two .. they will not see the third)
          Total .. Of the three factors, two are excellent firefighters.
          1. your1970
            your1970 16 July 2016 16: 52
            0
            "What makes you think that all this will burn?" and then "Total .. Out of three factors - two excellent firefighters" ??????
            Everything will burn, including trivial asphalt, in Nagasaki and Hiroshima - there is nothing to burn as such - fragile structures burned like gunpowder, more or less strong collapsed
            Z.Y. we moved away from the topic strongly, from TANKS and ATGMs what
            1. dvina71
              dvina71 16 July 2016 17: 07
              0
              Quote: your1970
              Everything will burn, including banal asphalt


              Enlightenment))
              Firefighter - firefighter.

              Fireman is a citizen who has undergone training, special training, allowed to extinguish fires and works in the fire department (Law of Moscow of March 12, 2008 N 13 "On fire safety in the city of Moscow").

              In the USSR, for 41 years, 715 JV were produced .. What and where burned down?
              1. your1970
                your1970 16 July 2016 18: 25
                0
                a little to the side - the USSR for 41 years out of its 715 JAV did NOT produce for example in Brussels, Warsaw, Washington, London and all sorts of other interesting places ... Therefore, nothing was burned anywhere ..
                The Semipalatinsk test site, to put it mildly in the DESERT, there was really no vegetation ...

                What are you clinging to in the winter ???? drinks
            2. dvina71
              dvina71 16 July 2016 17: 27
              +1
              Quote: your1970
              Z.Y. we moved away from the topic strongly, from TANKS and ATGMs

              Yes, here, all those unsubscribing into such a jungle climbed .. simply.
              Nobody wants to read TTX, but many people think of some kind of child prodigy .. Shot, forgot ... but hit?
              Such a system is good when you have one goal and it is contrasted against the general background .. A plane in the sky.
              But the tank on the ground. Imagine a battle. Explosions, flashes, something is burning, smoke .. So many temptations are in the GOS. Well, and the next. Javelin is only ATGM and nothing else.
              Soviet, Russian ATGMs are pocket artillery of motorized infantry. They have, besides the godfathers, landmines and thermal barracks. Which actually showed Syria.
              How can this be compared at all? And what conclusions about the combat effectiveness?
            3. Vadim237
              Vadim237 16 July 2016 19: 11
              0
              We already burned fine in 2010, then two million hectares burned down and, according to conservative estimates, 97 million cubic meters of wood, and thermal energy was released in three months from 354 megatons - so we already experienced one fiery apocalypse.
          2. tasey
            tasey 16 July 2016 18: 12
            0
            according to the FORCE of exposure ... 1. Shock wave - 50% 2. Light radiation - 35% 3. REM 4. Penetrating radiation 5. EMP

            22 years in the Strategic Rocket Forces.
            1. poquello
              poquello 17 July 2016 00: 08
              0
              Quote: tasey
              according to the FORCE of exposure ... 1. Shock wave - 50% 2. Light radiation - 35% 3. REM 4. Penetrating radiation 5. EMP

              22 years in the Strategic Rocket Forces.

              By the way, the question is, how much dust is involved in the mushroom in the sand equivalent per kiloton?
              1. Vadim237
                Vadim237 17 July 2016 17: 32
                +1
                1 megaton in a ground explosion - "The cloud raises about 280 thousand tons of dust, of which 120 thousand tons are the initial emission of dust and vapors from the funnel and 160 thousand tons are the convective component: the destruction of small pieces of soil when flying inside a fiery hemisphere, as well as molten particles from the surface of the earth. "
        2. Vadim237
          Vadim237 16 July 2016 18: 59
          0
          The Rosrezerv’s stores have everything: water, food, generators, fuel, medicines, vaccines, equipment, machinery, construction equipment, they even say - bridges across all the country's rivers. So, in case of a nuclear or other catastrophe, Russia is ready.
          1. your1970
            your1970 17 July 2016 11: 24
            0
            it was ... The storehouse of the road administration was long ago dismantled, there were bridges and the road surface was collapsible, and whistles for traffic controllers ....
            1. Vadim237
              Vadim237 17 July 2016 12: 52
              0
              All this already lies elsewhere - it is being updated and replenished, in Russia the closed costs for each year are 2,5 trillion rubles, and it seems that part of this amount goes to Rosrezerv.
    2. ISSIDOR
      ISSIDOR 16 July 2016 14: 43
      0
      Do not forget about conflicts like 8-8-8
    3. Paranoid50
      Paranoid50 16 July 2016 21: 24
      +3
      Quote: your1970
      that most of all TANKS in their entire history have suffered from banal "Molotov cocktails" + RPG

      It is worth mentioning the PTA, only over the years WWII and WWII have been shot forward for decades, now there are probably not so many tanks around the world. hi
  • Kostya Andreev
    Kostya Andreev 16 July 2016 13: 29
    +4
    I wonder what ammunition can hit a modern tank in the forehead? javelin?

    Before blaming our designers for reluctance, inability to find out what motives they were guided by! for instance
    The accuracy of Metis' guidance depends solely on the directness of the hands of the operator, which is difficult to predict in combat conditions. Javelin is less demanding on this indicator.

    Then, if the primis of the hands in a battle is unpredictable, but we must admit that the IR head will also unpredictably respond to other heat sources! and how spikes and others will behave in electronic warfare conditions. interference protection of TV and IR channels is good, but the enemy is not worth it.

    I do not think. what to make an analog of javelin, or spike is not a solvable problem for our designers.

    dear author, this is certainly a good principle, I forgot the shot, but where is the guarantee that the ammunition will find its target, and it will not put up interference.

    about the beautiful word laser tag, but how does the author have confidence that the tank will not be falsely irradiated from different directions, and so the head will not spin from spinning the tower towards the sources?

    Hooray patriotism is bad, but even worse defeatism. And so in my opinion the article lacks objectivity.
    the author did not say about tank protection systems, and it is impossible to consider the capabilities of grenade launchers from them.
    he shot from 7 and flies.
    About mestizos and other things described in the article only in tiorii
    1. poquello
      poquello 17 July 2016 00: 14
      +1
      Quote: Kostya Andreev
      about the beautiful word laser tag, but where does the author have confidence that the tank will not falsely irradiate from different directions and so that from spinning the tower towards the sources, the crew will not feel dizzy?

      ETT Jews on a carrot muddy suppression of lasers, and the same thought arose - 10 laser pointers will deprive the carrot of time for reaction
  • chunga-changa
    chunga-changa 16 July 2016 13: 44
    +4
    The military do not just think "not against", but rather dream of such complexes. Incl. the author confused warm with soft, they don't "don't want", but - they can't. We do not have an element base for the 3rd generation ATGM, they do not produce it, they have just started trying to do something similar in air defense and aviation. I am just silent about the 4th generation, even UAVs are still being assembled on imported electronics, but here the requirements for the communication channel, optics, electronics and data transfer rates will be higher. Not to mention the "BIUS" which simply does not exist over our battlefield yet, there are its rudiments in separate elements. Who will give this "target designation" to an ordinary 4th generation ATGM operator from a linear anti-tank system, infantry from a trench, by a mobile phone?
    In my opinion, we should continue to rely on quite decent ATGMs of the 2+ generation, ignore the third generation, immediately put all our efforts into developing the 4th one, where the rocket can be made on the basis of modernization and improvement 2+, everything depends only on the BIOS and communication and transmission systems data.
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 16 July 2016 13: 57
      0
      Quote: chunga-changa
      Incl. the author confused warm with soft, they don't "don't want", but - they can't

      Uh ... Exposing the lies of the authorities is a thing, of course, necessary. But it’s also good to have a minimal understanding of the issue.

      They don’t want to.

      Quote: chunga-changa
      I’m just silent about the 4th generation, even the UAVs are going to import electronics

      4th generation requires not "advanced" electronics at all, but advanced software

      Quote: chunga-changa
      In my opinion, we should continue to rely on quite decent ATGM 2+ generations

      Such a generation does not exist in nature.
      1. Bayonet
        Bayonet 16 July 2016 16: 04
        +1
        Quote: Spade
        4th generation requires not at all "advanced" electronics,

        And where without her? You can certainly assemble a "smart" seeker the size of a bucket, but who needs it? what
        1. Lopatov
          Lopatov 16 July 2016 16: 36
          0
          The fourth generation is primarily recognition.

          And the human eye, as an optical instrument, is complete bullshit compared to modern optics. At the same time, the probability of recognizing a target of the "Abrams" type on the ground in a person is several orders of magnitude higher than that of the most modern automated surveillance system. A trail of goslings is enough.
    2. dvina71
      dvina71 16 July 2016 14: 08
      +2
      Quote: chunga-changa
      We do not have the element base for 3rd generation ATGM

      Well, what kind of nonsense ..?
      We have an element base for "Verba" .. But for the conditional "Russdjavlenia" not?
      Are you seriously?
      1. chunga-changa
        chunga-changa 16 July 2016 21: 09
        +1
        Yes, they began to do something in the air defense system, silence in the ATGM. Or do you think if "Verboy" is shot at the tank, then it will hit?
        1. dvina71
          dvina71 16 July 2016 23: 43
          +1
          Quote: chunga-changa
          Or do you think if "Verboy" is shot at the tank, then it will hit?

          In my opinion .. In my opinion, the military did not satisfy the Needle, they ordered the industry and the design bureau a new product. "Willow" suited them.
          It’s not so difficult to add to the Fri missile launcher. And if we don’t make such man-portable air defense systems, it’s most likely that our military does not see such weapons as part of the armament of platoons and companies.
          But for them the anti-tank systems were issued and are now being released without a seeker. With a variety of warheads.
          There are based on the Tiger and BPM3 ATGM with a range of 8-10km.
          That everything on the javelins is all the sum gone?
  • Aries
    Aries 16 July 2016 13: 45
    +1
    "Counterargument 2. Not captured - and not necessary. Conditional Jvelyn can work on a similar target in the" grenade launcher "mode (without turning on the seeker)"
    I would like to see how the author in "grenade launcher mode" will shoot at a tank at a distance of the same 2 km, which he often juggles in his article ...
    1. Genry
      Genry 16 July 2016 15: 03
      0
      Quote: Aries
      I would like to see how the author in "grenade launcher mode" will shoot at a tank at a distance of the same 2 km, which he often juggles in his article ...

      The author does not even suspect that Javelin is intended to be defeated in the upper hemisphere and will not penetrate the frontal armor of the tank.
  • Aries
    Aries 16 July 2016 13: 48
    +1
    "Just by eye? I sense that it is a laser rangefinder, but then, excuse me, what's the point in this" keeping the beam over the target "if the target is irradiated anyway?"
    Summed up the author Chuyk ... there is no laser rangefinder in the described complexes ... And the tank will know about the approaching rocket 2-3 seconds before it is received in the forehead ...
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 16 July 2016 13: 58
      0
      Quote: Aries
      there is no laser range finder in the described complexes ..

      There is. In those that can really shoot like that.

      "Cornet" is not one of those.
      1. Aries
        Aries 16 July 2016 14: 20
        0
        I repeat once again, neither in Metis, nor in Cornet, and even less in Jewellin there are no laser rangefinders ...
        1. Lopatov
          Lopatov 16 July 2016 16: 39
          0
          And in the Belarusian ATGM "Shershen", which, unlike the "Kornet", is able to guide a missile over the line of sight, it is.
          1. Aries
            Aries 16 July 2016 22: 12
            +2
            The Belarusian hornet is 2 times heavier than the Cornet and by the way is called not "able to guide a rocket over the line of sight", but implements the shooting mode with an excess and the Cornet has this mode originally ...
  • AID.S
    AID.S 16 July 2016 13: 51
    +1
    Associations first for some reason ..

    I know there are more families
    Where they look with lust
    On foreign stickers ..
    And they eat Russian fat.

    What is good for the Russian is death for the German.

    In my opinion, an amateur, the smarter and more sophisticated ATGM, the worse for a tank and vice versa. Our systems have limitations in cost, in electronics, so our designers have to invent or justify tricky bolts with left-hand thread. How they behave against modern MBT of potential partners, there is no reliable information in the public domain. And only one thing can be said that RPG is all the same.
  • Aries
    Aries 16 July 2016 13: 52
    +2
    "ATGM does not fly instantly, and, moreover, rather slowly. While it is flying ..."
    A little Russian language for the author - ATGM - anti-tank guided missile, so ATGM is not him, but she ...
  • Aries
    Aries 16 July 2016 13: 55
    0
    "Javelin was put into service in 1996. Metis - in 1978 (original version) with upgrades in 1992 (Metis-M) and 2016 (Metis-M1). Although Metis-M1 was developed much earlier, because it was exported since 2004. That is, the original Metis is much older than Javelin ... "
    Comparing the "original" Metis with the modern one is like comparing the "Ford-T" and the modern "Ford Explorer" ...
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 16 July 2016 14: 04
      +3
      Quote: Aries
      Comparing the "original" Metis with the modern one is like comparing the "Ford-T" and the modern "Ford Explorer" ...

      Not quite.
      The only difference is in the warhead. So it's more like a comparison of a "Ford-T" with a "Ford-T" with a spare wheel
      1. Aries
        Aries 16 July 2016 14: 22
        -2
        Learn materiel ... search the Internet Metis and Metis-M1 and you will see that there is not only a "spare tire"
        1. Lopatov
          Lopatov 16 July 2016 16: 44
          +2
          Well tell me about "not only" Kali weasel. Once you know. 8))))))))))

          As for me, a wire, tracer, coordinator. As it was, it remains.

          With the same "Tou", which switched from the wires to the radio channel, received an additional tracer for the IR headlamp and the ability to hit targets on the fly and should not be compared ... That's right there, "Ford-T" and "Ford-A"

          Well, "Metis" ... I got nothing more than a spare tire.
          1. Aries
            Aries 16 July 2016 22: 14
            0
            And how do you think the Ford Explorer is different from the Ford-t? The same 4 wheels, the same round steering wheel, engine and 4 seats with 4 doors again and what is funny is the same control system ... a person pedals and turns the steering wheel ...
          2. Aries
            Aries 16 July 2016 22: 17
            0
            Do you know why the tou rocket received an additional tracer? And please mention the advantages of radiology over PLC ...
  • Aries
    Aries 16 July 2016 13: 58
    +1
    "That is, it makes no difference whether you spend 30 seconds on aiming or targeting: there is no advantage of the 2nd generation anti-tank systems here."
    It would not hurt the author to imagine how to stand and look through the Jewelin’s sight at the target for 30 s and not be able to shoot at it ...
  • Aries
    Aries 16 July 2016 14: 02
    +1
    "So, the Metis-M1 ATGM, which is in service with the Russian army, is 20 seconds. (+ Flight time to the target - up to 12 seconds.), For" Cornet "- about a minute (+ a few seconds to start, + up to 10 sec. per flight) .That is, in fact, the 2nd generation ATGMs DO NOT have an advantage in operational efficiency ...
    The author is cunning, because for 20 s for Metis this is a transfer from a passing position to a combat one, Jewelin also has it, only Metis can shoot at him right after him, Au Dzhevelin just starts the same 30 with the capture of the target of the ICG seeker ...
  • Aries
    Aries 16 July 2016 14: 06
    +2
    "Counter-argument 4. Again, there are two of them. First: the probability of hitting a target with one launch of the 3rd generation ATGM is still higher than that of any 2nd generation ATGM."
    I would like to understand what the author's unfounded assertion is based on ... besides, the author would not be bad to know that the probability of defeat is a complex indicator, which is not measured by the categories "higher or lower" ...
  • Aries
    Aries 16 July 2016 14: 11
    +2
    "For maintenance and combat use of Javelin, a calculation of one person is enough ... Metis, at least theoretically, can be serviced by one crew number (although, of course, two bales at once - 17kg and 19kg - is problematic to run across the battlefield for a long time)."
    Again the author is cunning ... one person with Jewelin - 1 rocket, respectively 1 target, and 2 people with Metis, who brought the author - 4 rockets, respectively 4 goals ...
  • Franciscan
    Franciscan 16 July 2016 14: 30
    +1
    Well, the article is purely like on ukrov resources, give us a jewel and we will all win. Kindergarten . It’s not a Jewell or a Cornet who is fighting, but a man. if your hands are straight, then you can get a little tank out; if not, then no super putter ptrk will help.
    1. Lanista
      16 July 2016 17: 00
      +3
      So a shovel tank can be disabled. You have a choice - a shovel or Javelin. What will you take?
      1. Aries
        Aries 16 July 2016 22: 21
        +1
        Surely the author has really appeared ... I'll take the Cornet ...
      2. Vadim237
        Vadim237 17 July 2016 12: 59
        0
        It’s bad that there is no third-generation ATGM, with combined GOS ultraviolet plus IR, with a firing range of 6000 meters - I would take it against tanks and everything else.
        1. Aries
          Aries 17 July 2016 18: 26
          0
          ATGM with GOS operating in the UV spectrum - nonsense, they will not be able to shoot in the afternoon - there will be too much interference from solar radiation reflected from everything that is in the field of view ...
          1. Vadim237
            Vadim237 18 July 2016 00: 09
            0
            In the UV range - and the wavelengths are different - there will be less natural interference, pointing at negative contrast - the silhouette of the tank, the pole of the second channel is infrared.
  • Koshak
    Koshak 16 July 2016 14: 53
    +2
    In the 80s, ATGMs corresponded to "the wishes of a potential enemy." Then the 90s began, it was not up to that, then the 2000s, the situation did not change very much ... Now it is 2016, it is not necessary to report new equipment in "open sources", but there should already be a new technique. Made according to a well-written terms of reference. IMHO, I'm a virtual general. hi
  • spike-110
    spike-110 16 July 2016 15: 02
    +2
    no, of course, Metis, Competition and Cornet proved that they can successfully burn both T-72s and Abrams (Merkava, Leclerci) .. moreover, it turned out that foreigners took Cornet and Metis-M1 first, and only then the Russian Ministry of Defense began to acquire .. I ask you to don’t throw tomatoes .. take it into service and start mass deliveries to the troops, two big differences .. as they correctly noted above, everything rests on our electronics .. not in vain I think the same UAVs were first taken in Israel (I mean assembly from components ) .. before and our military .. I remembered how long they spent time with the same UAVs ... they just couldn’t think of what kind of troops they could be assigned to .. reconnaissance, army aviation, rep, artillery ... and now how many years everyone decides whether they need a third-generation ptrk or not .. it's a shame that the Chinese have already shown two portable ptrk and one per btr with optical fiber ..
  • Slon1978
    Slon1978 16 July 2016 15: 05
    +3
    Quote: Verdun
    1.Laser guidance does not always mean having a laser rangefinder on the launcher. It is quite enough to have such a guidance head on a rocket. The detection of an activated rocket does not mean the detection and defeat of PU.


    After that, I didn’t get a grasp of your comment anymore - for nonsense. With any method of optical (laser) guidance - semi-active or GOS - the carrier (helicopter / plane or ATGM calculation) irradiates the target until it hits. About shooting from RPGs at 2 km I will not say anything at all.
  • Slon1978
    Slon1978 16 July 2016 15: 43
    +4
    Quote: Inok10
    ... isn't it nonsense? ... direct visibility in the mid-terrain is just 5-6 km. ...

    You just wrote nonsense. A person cannot see beyond the horizon. Visibility horizon for a person of average height 170 cm. In the steppe is approx. 4,7 km under ideal atmospheric conditions. In active combat on flat terrain, firing ATGMs further than 2 km is extremely rare. However, the firing range of ATGMs is up to 7 km. has value, albeit limited - for example, control of roads from heights.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Slon1978
    Slon1978 16 July 2016 15: 44
    0
    For the article I want to say thanks to the author, he sincerely tried to understand the topic, albeit somewhat emotionally. However, there are a number of points that I advise the author to pay attention to:
    1. A comparison of the tactical purpose of TOW and Cornet, Javelin and Metis-M1 I think is quite acceptable. But why does the author compare the advantages and disadvantages of these complexes 1 to 1? By COST, they need to be compared 1 to 2 and 1 to 5, respectively. Can Javelin theoretically destroy 5 armored vehicles?
    2. For the introduction of anti-tank systems such as Javelin in the Russian Army, it must be professional. I think there is no need to remind of the numerous documented cases of firing from anti-tank systems against single soldiers. It is clear that this is a matter of discipline in units, but let's proceed from the realities.
    3. The author in vain thinks that the Javelin GOS IR cannot be knocked down after launch. Read in detail about SAZ Afganit. The installation of a metallized smoke screen knocks down the capture of the infrared seeker. The launch of Javelin is detected by UV sensors on the residual plasma of the rocket engine and, presumably, is further conducted by the T-14 airborne radar with the firing of smoke grenades with metallized granules at the right time. Also, the installation of optical suppression systems (such as Vitebsk or President-S) on armored vehicles is implemented much easier than on aircraft carriers and has not been implemented until now only because there are cheaper methods (see above).
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 17 July 2016 13: 05
      0
      "Read about SAZ Afganit in detail." All that is on the network about this KAZ is speculation, fairy tales and assumptions and the name of this complex is different.
  • Unbearable
    Unbearable 16 July 2016 16: 20
    0
    For example, a forest burned in Russia, there were such cases. When the "firefighter troops" were thrown into the "very hot" to fight the fire with the most common forest knapsacks for extinguishing fires. There were very frequent cases that they died. It is necessary to think of this. After all, S. Shoigu himself signed the instruction about this when he was the head of the RF Ministry of Emergency Situations. In my opinion, since the middle of last year, the sending of a "fire brigade" to the "very hot" was canceled, after the next victims. I mean, Sergei Shoigu does not like modern technologies too much and does not understand how they can save the lives of personnel. In general, the top leadership of the RF Ministry of Defense lacks officers with backward thinking.
  • Unbearable
    Unbearable 16 July 2016 16: 22
    +1
    Of course, the Russian army needs a modern ATGM, which is convenient in mobility and smart, with a powerful charge. It must be so, the military noticed an enemy tank. It is enough to simply release a missile in the direction of this tank, it must itself detect and overcome all modern defenses, destroy. Or place the backward ATGMs on "ground or air robots" with a "super computerized radar sight", which are capable of detecting a tank at a great distance with the latest generation camouflage. Moreover, such robots should be a single whole as part of a platoon of people, and also be completely invisible to people.
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 17 July 2016 13: 07
      0
      Better yet, equip such ramjet anti-tank systems - these are already printed on 3D printers.
  • Zaurbek
    Zaurbek 16 July 2016 16: 28
    0
    The truth, as always, is in the middle. Yesterday I read an article that the Russian Federation has mastered, finally, the production of infrared matrices for thermal imagers. This means a fairly quick saturation of our army with thermal imaging equipment. Cornet manufacturers are working on equipment that recognizes the target and itself holds it, while guiding ATGMs. Conclusion, we are waiting for new control equipment for the Cornets and Metis and the likeness of Javelin. Recent conflicts show just the lack of worthy goals for the Javelins and the mass of goals for the TOU, Cornets and Métis. I think the primary task is to equip the Mi-28 / Ka-52 and Su-25 ATGMs and forget them with thermal imaging arrays in the rocket itself.
  • Genry
    Genry 16 July 2016 16: 42
    +1
    The teapot wrote an article, and everyone began to worry.
    Well, he read the praise-advertising posters on Javelin and "saw the light" that we definitely don't have this and decided to "notify the public". Only he read little on this topic and thought very little (well, not an analyst;).

    The Javelins are good in open areas where there is no way for the tank to hide, but there is also no shelter for calculation (2 km for a machine gun is not a problem - not to lean out).
    Javelins are unsuitable in urban environments or mountainous-wooded areas, where the target can move periodically in hiding. Javelin’s shot easily loses its target if it periodically passes behind an obstacle restricting viewing and changes its visible area and contour.
    Although the Javelins are more mobile compared to the Cornet (manual RPGs are much more convenient in the city), they are completely useless when the target appears for up to 30 seconds once every ten minutes (well, they can’t even go into aiming mode).
    A direct shot of Javelin at the tank is useless due to low armor penetration (designed for the upper hemisphere).

    ATGM "Kornet" professes the principle of "saw and shot". A target that has emerged from cover for a couple of tens of seconds will no longer be able to hide.
    On the issue of destroying the calculation for the operation of radiation sensors: the laser beam is highlighted a couple of meters above the target and lowers to the target when the rocket approaches. Cornet also has a remote control of 50m.
    Regarding the defeat of active defense. On one laser track, two missiles can be launched to hit targets with active defense (KAZ).
    In addition to the above, the Cornet is not only ATGMs, but also high-precision weapons of the battlefield, which allows using, in addition to cumulative missiles, missiles with a volume-detonating charge against any enemy firing points.
  • rubidiy
    rubidiy 16 July 2016 17: 50
    +3
    Quote: Inok10
    Two morons with Javelin at a distance of 2 km., This is not power, these are two corpses ...

    how did you define it? Also in the eye?

    The author openly pulls the owl onto the globe, but this does not mean that there is no problem. She is. They call it technical backwardness and underfunding. If the mess in your head still does not allow you to look at things sensibly, then think at your leisure that none of the THREE Russian attack helicopters has a 3rd generation ATGM, i.e. with the principle of "fire and forget". The helicopter, instead of firing a rocket at a long distance and avoiding potential fire, should fly in a direction that allows it to keep the guidance system on the target. This means the inevitable need to stay in the firing zone, the longer the farther the rocket needs to fly to the target. Against slippers, this can somehow still work, but against a modern army with anti-aircraft missiles - no.
  • Forest
    Forest 16 July 2016 18: 17
    +2
    Finally, at least someone drew attention to the complete backwardness of our army in anti-tank weapons and in ATGM in particular. If you fight with NATO - the operator of the same Metis is a guaranteed suicide bomber, and given that the NATO tanks do not always take NATO tanks in the forehead - it becomes sad.
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 16 July 2016 19: 19
      -4
      Our army lags behind not only in the ATGM but also in artillery ammunition, target designation systems, aiming, as well as in UAVs - from all over the world.
      1. Aries
        Aries 16 July 2016 22: 29
        0
        Well, in everything we are lagging behind ... only for some reason the whole Middle East is fighting with our weapons, and not with the NATO ones ... can you tell me why? Yes, because our most reliable and efficient, because the samples were developed according to the requirements of those who passed the Great Patriotic War and not just passed, but won! Not a single NATO country waged war on its territory, they do not know what weapons should be in the hands of a soldier behind whose back his house with his wife, children and parents ...
        1. Vadim237
          Vadim237 17 July 2016 01: 04
          +1
          "Well, we are lagging behind in everything ... only for some reason the entire Middle East is fighting with our weapons, and not with NATO weapons ... can you tell me why?" - Because almost all the Middle Eastern countries are rogue and they fight mainly with the weapons that they supplied them, you live well and thank you - the USSR for decades. But the time will come and they will also need new weapons.
        2. Professor
          Professor 17 July 2016 08: 13
          +3
          Quote: Aries
          Well, in everything we are lagging behind ... only for some reason the whole Middle East is fighting with our weapons, and not with the NATO ones ... can you tell me why?

          Seriously? Whole BV? Especially the Saudis, Jordanians, Egypt, Qatar, the UAE, Israel. wassat
          In general, there are more Western weapons in the BV than Russian ones.
          1. Aries
            Aries 17 July 2016 09: 41
            +1
            Of the countries you have listed, 3 have Cornet in service ... But there are more Western weapons in the BV, because the SGA give them loans to buy the SGA. Have you ever heard of unfortunate competition in the market?
            1. Professor
              Professor 17 July 2016 09: 56
              +1
              Quote: Aries
              Of the countries you have listed, 3 have Cornet in service ... But there are more Western weapons in the BV, because the SGA give them loans to buy the SGA. Have you ever heard of unfortunate competition in the market?

              And how many of them are armed with TOU? How many countries in BV USSR and Russia gave / give weapons in general for nothing?
              1. Aries
                Aries 17 July 2016 10: 21
                0
                This question is not for me ...
      2. Forest
        Forest 17 July 2016 15: 18
        0
        Quote: Vadim237
        Our army lags behind not only in the ATGM but also in artillery ammunition, target designation systems, aiming, as well as in UAVs - from all over the world.

        In artillery ammunition, we’re not far behind. The much-praised Escalibur thing is so rare that you can put and take pictures of the whole battery in parts of them under the protection of an individual soldier.
    2. Aries
      Aries 16 July 2016 22: 25
      0
      Do you want to sit in a NATO tank when Cornet flies into his forehead?
      1. corporal
        corporal 17 July 2016 04: 33
        +5
        Quote: Aries
        Do you want to sit in a NATO tank when Cornet flies into his forehead?

        And you do not want to sit in our tank when Spike or Javelin arrives at his roof? wink
        1. Aries
          Aries 17 July 2016 07: 21
          0
          And I do not claim that Spike will not do anything to our tank, it’s a friend from the forest who says that Cornet will not do anything to American tanks ...
  • Hypocrite
    Hypocrite 17 July 2016 08: 56
    0
    I am an amateur and a teapot, and I don’t know: is there really no antidote for javelin?
    Since this device is aimed at an ir-signature, it is necessary to change this very signature for the target, for example, by a system of operational cooling.
    Another question: does the crew have the technical means to detect javelin guidance?
    1. Professor
      Professor 17 July 2016 09: 53
      +3
      Quote: Hange
      Since this device is aimed at an ir-signature, it is necessary to change this very signature for the target, for example, by a system of operational cooling.

      Change does not work, it's not a chameleon. Thermal radiation can be reduced, thereby reducing the effective range of the Javelin. With Spike there is more trouble, it is induced in the optical, and not just the thermal spectrum.

      Quote: Hange
      Another question: does the crew have the technical means to detect javelin guidance?

      He does not have such funds. Ignorance is passive.
  • Mentat
    Mentat 17 July 2016 11: 15
    +1
    “Exemplary Javelin”, as the author calls it, is an outdated and expensive model, like a gold toilet, with inferior characteristics. Currently, the price of Javelin is about 120 US dollars. It is hard to imagine how at this price and mediocre characteristics this ATGM can be called exemplary.

    The key point in this topic is the fact that the current generation of guidance heads used in all, without exception, “3rd generation ATGMs” is outdated and very expensive to manufacture.

    In this regard, the notorious 3rd generation has just an overwhelmingly low price / performance ratio.

    That’s the whole “secret”. In Russia, 3rd-generation samples of current technology exist (the same Autonomy, versions of Cornet with IR-GOS), but they did not go into the series due to the extremely low overall efficiency.

    There is no difficulty in creating such products. We can release them right now, but it's just not optimal.

    Let us briefly consider the situation in the world with 3rd generation supplies to understand the big picture. There are two main suppliers of these systems in the world: the USA and Israel. The latter simply makes money on this by intensively advertising and exporting “super-systems” and making a very good cash-draw on it. In the USA, a corruption scheme has been worked out over the years for loading defense industry enterprises with orders for expensive weapons. On YouTube, you can see examples of the use of Javelins in adobe huts. Another example is the war in Libya. The ships loaded by the Tomahawks arrived in Libya before the adoption of the UN resolution, their application was planned ahead of time before any resolutions. Over 100 missiles were fired, each of which $ 1. The defense industry enterprises received good orders, the military received combat allowances. For a contract of $ 500 million, “lobbyists” will tear their ass on the British flag there.

    These are their own established patterns of profit. They have a very indirect relation to the combat effectiveness of the discussed weapons.

    Against this background, the inflating cheeks and cries of the author of the "article" can only be explained by the divineness of his expertise. Maybe this is such a clumsy attempt to tell us once again how bad everything is in Russia, it is even possible that this is one of the elements of an information attack on our military-industrial complex in an attempt to impose on us an not optimal, very expensive line for developing anti-tank systems. However, I am inclined to believe that this is just another “couch expert” who decided to show off his “knowledge”.
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 17 July 2016 13: 18
      0
      "That's the whole 'secret'. In Russia, samples of the 3rd generation using the current technology exist (the same Autonomy, versions of the Kornet with IR-GOS), but they did not go into the series because of the extremely low overall efficiency." They did not work with us, because they could not bring the new GOS to mind. But the time will come and we will also come to this. Moreover, soon the NATO countries will be armed with a tracking system that determines the direction of enemy fire.
  • Mentat
    Mentat 17 July 2016 14: 15
    0
    Quote: Vadim237
    They did not go with us, because they could not bring the new GOS to mind.

    Are these your fantasies or do you have accurate information?

    But the time will come and we will come to this too.

    It will come when the technological generation changes and the price / efficiency parameter becomes sane.
  • Anton Valerevich
    Anton Valerevich 17 July 2016 16: 05
    -1
    The approximate range of the horizon from the height of human growth on Earth is 4.7 km, the author does not accidentally write about the satellite of Jupiter about Europe? And what is this attack on the creators of "Cornet"? They made an ATGM to defeat enemy tanks at a distance significantly exceeding the firing range of their guns, this was their main task, and they coped with it perfectly! ATGM "Kornet" really follows the target along the laser beam, but the beam does not illuminate the surface of the tank, because it shines a little higher, and the guidance head catches the laser radiation reflected from suspended particles in the atmosphere and corrects the missile's course accordingly.
    Actually, I saw absolutely no criticism in this article. The author simply poured a tub of slops on the developers of Kornet, and nothing else, while not forgetting to praise Javelin and Spike, which, in principle, are unable to overcome the Afghanit KAZ.
    1. Lanista
      17 July 2016 16: 33
      -2
      Quote: Anton Valeryevich
      ATGM "Kornet" really follows the target along the laser beam, but the beam does not illuminate the surface of the tank, because it shines a little higher, and the guidance head catches the laser radiation reflected from suspended particles in the atmosphere and corrects the missile's course accordingly.

      Did you understand what you wrote?

      In fact, the laser beam in the Cornet performs the same function as the wire in traditional 2nd generation ATGMs. The task of the laser beam in the Cornet is to shine "in the butt" of the rocket, where it has a receiving unit. The problem is that if the ATGM is flying in a straight line, then the residual radiation will shine exactly into the tank's receiver; and if "with an excess of the visual line of sight" (according to the Tula developers), then how the ATGM determines the moment of returning to the line of sight is not clear. As I already wrote, most likely with the help of a laser rangefinder on a PU, but then all these shamanic dances with keeping the beam above the target are meaningless.
      1. Aries
        Aries 17 July 2016 18: 21
        +1
        Once again, for the stubborn author, I repeat, there is no range finder in the Cornet ... and its role is not at all like the PLC in the 2nd generation of ATGM ... if you do not understand this or do not know, do not powder the brains of the readers ... the rocket does not know when it to descend to the PU target line, she knows only about the center of the beam, but the beam drops to the PU ...
        1. Uryukc
          Uryukc 17 July 2016 19: 14
          0
          The author is of course stubborn, but there is a range finder, at least in the version for technology.
          There is an automatic tracking device that lowers the beam at a given distance, which is entered manually or captured by a laser range finder (he himself is not an operator, but read somewhere here). That, however, does not oblige the operator to shine in the technique itself and can be measured next to it.

          https://topwar.ru/53227-boevoy-robot-na-baze-avtomobilya-tigr-s-ptrk-kornet.html
          1. Aries
            Aries 17 July 2016 21: 52
            0
            Now read the article again and find at least one mention of Cornet on technology? The whole article about comparing anti-tank systems for remote control ...
            1. Uryukc
              Uryukc 18 July 2016 04: 50
              0
              Yes, do not care about the article, it is not objective. In addition, there is a suspicion that the machines also have a rangefinder, I don’t know for sure.
    2. Professor
      Professor 18 July 2016 20: 03
      0
      Could not pass by.

      Quote: Anton Valeryevich
      ATGM "Kornet" really follows the target along the laser beam, but the beam does not illuminate the surface of the tank, because it shines a little higher, and the guidance head catches the laser radiation reflected from suspended particles in the atmosphere and corrects the missile's course accordingly.

      There is no guidance head on a Cornet rocket.
      A rocket catches a laser beam with an ass.
      No reflection is caught.