Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

ATGMs and RPGs for infantry - a thread for rebels around the world to choose their ATGM supplier.


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 721
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

So. A while ago Colli asked me whether you can shape stabilise a long rod. I booted up Solidworks and went to work. One thing led to another, and we ended up at this: And if you wonder

My article in english about Carl Gustaf and NLAW - hope it will be interesting: https://fragout.uberflip.com/i/1115818-frag-out-magazine-24/47? In the end of the article is interesting

On ‎25‎/‎02‎/‎2017 at 2:49 AM, Renegade334 said:

@Mighty_Zuk: this "little" baby would've been an even niftier toy, sheer size and lack of high maneuvrability put aside.

The space opera SFX would bring a smile to the gunner every time...

 

How would it fare against NERA, compared to a regular APFSDS? (let's say a DM-53 or M829A2)

 

On ‎25‎/‎02‎/‎2017 at 1:10 PM, Mighty_Zuk said:

It would probably not fare well against tanks even at its maximum range where it is supposed to have the highest level of penetration, unless it can side shot. But it's probably really cheap compared to existing HEAT based ATGMs, which is something. 

Problem is, it's not dual purpose, which could definitely be the reason it was cancelled. Realistically, while ATGMs have very clearly the "Anti Tank" in their name, their by far most prolific use is against soft targets.

 

So yeah, just a waste of money here. Great for gaming purposes though.

Advertising has it hitting 1.5km/s in 5 seconds, so it should do as well as a standard KEP. Better, if you can sling a thicker, longer penetrator than current-gen 120mm APDSFS.

Dual use is a problem. Then again, a missile that big impacting a structure is going to leave a mark no matter what. True dual purpose should be as simple as sticking a charge somewhere in the body to either blow up inside the target or prefragment the missile body just prior to impact.

 

My guess regarding adoption is that; 1. it is a 3 metre long missile with roughly the capability of Javelin, 2. being lower-cost has not been the sort of winner you'd expect in US miliary purchasing history, and 3. popping tanks has not, as you point out, been much of a necessity for the US military since about 2003.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Xlucine said:

A PELE version for softer targets?

= another 3 metre long missile to cart around. Or adapting the design to include hot-swappable warheads.

 

I wonder if they might have had better luck with a top-attack version, but can't think of a way to make that work without more expensive electronics. I guess the third option is to use a really cheap and simple guidance system  (beam rider perhaps?) and just shoot three 1m long/165mm wide rockets out of the same tube. Even without sophisticated shaped charge designs that's going to leave a mark.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Make a segmented penetrator design with a break-off tip to foil K5-type ERA, like the M829A3.  Have the break-off tip be a PELE, while the rest is a normal KEP.

There, dual purpose missile.

These high-speed ATGMs seem like a fine idea.  The operator needs to spend a lot less time guiding the missile to the target, which means in practice a whole lot less getting shot.

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Collimatrix said:

Make a segmented penetrator design with a break-off tip to foil K5-type ERA, like the M829A3.  Have the break-off tip be a PELE, while the rest is a normal KEP.

There, dual purpose missile.

These high-speed ATGMs seem like a fine idea.  The operator needs to spend a lot less time guiding the missile to the target, which means in practice a whole lot less getting shot.

Any idea what the cheapest guidance approach is?

 

Edit: I'm thinking we already have a page like this, but if not could we move all the LOSAT stuff to a 'KEP missile love thread' or something?

Link to post
Share on other sites

What about a two stage swingfire-like top attack missile? 

Launch the missile upwards around 45-70 degrees with the first booster, then ignite the second soild-fuel rocket to accelerate it towards the target. If the arch is high enough, then it should simply need to be pointed towards the target and it would hit it at 30 degrees, from horizontal. 

But all things considered, wouldn't KEP missiles be quite bulky? Thereby limiting them to long range AT role, most likely vehicle mounted.

But I have to say, 3 meter long missile sounds like a pain in the ass to work with for a AFV designer, if you want to protect the missile.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Xoon said:

What about a two stage swingfire-like top attack missile? 

Launch the missile upwards around 45-70 degrees with the first booster, then ignite the second soild-fuel rocket to accelerate it towards the target. If the arch is high enough, then it should simply need to be pointed towards the target and it would hit it at 30 degrees, from horizontal. 

But all things considered, wouldn't KEP missiles be quite bulky? Thereby limiting them to long range AT role, most likely vehicle mounted.

But I have to say, 3 meter long missile sounds like a pain in the ass to work with for a AFV designer, if you want to protect the missile.

Already proposed :) 

On ‎27‎/‎02‎/‎2017 at 3:45 PM, Toxn said:

= another 3 metre long missile to cart around. Or adapting the design to include hot-swappable warheads.

 

I wonder if they might have had better luck with a top-attack version, but can't think of a way to make that work without more expensive electronics. I guess the third option is to use a really cheap and simple guidance system  (beam rider perhaps?) and just shoot three 1m long/165mm wide rockets out of the same tube. Even without sophisticated shaped charge designs that's going to leave a mark.

KEP missiles would be bulky, but you can always hang them outside the crew armour compartment and resign yourself to losing them if things go wrong.

Top attack should be a lot less bulky, and thermal imaging for guidance gets cheaper all the time. I'm accordingly going to guess that something Strix might actually catch on for dedicated anti-tank applications.

Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Collimatrix said:

Make a segmented penetrator design with a break-off tip to foil K5-type ERA, like the M829A3.  Have the break-off tip be a PELE, while the rest is a normal KEP.

There, dual purpose missile.

These high-speed ATGMs seem like a fine idea.  The operator needs to spend a lot less time guiding the missile to the target, which means in practice a whole lot less getting shot.

The killer app would be something relatively small, cheap and simple to use. Is there any chance that you could make an accurate unguided KEP missile? Or something that just flies in a straight line from the launcher using a few cellphone gyros?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Instead of going long you can also go for a higher speed, to get further into the hydrodynamic area and if possible to go over the hydrodynamic limit. 

@Collimatrix since we haven't worked on it in ages and we're talking about the subject now anyway (kinda), should/can I post the renders I made of 'that thing we did'?

Link to post
Share on other sites

So.

A while ago Colli asked me whether you can shape stabilise a long rod. I booted up Solidworks and went to work. One thing led to another, and we ended up at this:

REWSynB.jpg

And if you wonder that in the shit that is, that's an Armour Piercing Shape Stabilised Ramjet Assisted Discarding Sabot shell.

That's right, we put a Ramjet on a long rod penetrator.

The thing I'm not completely sure about is the shape stabilisation, which we use to 'feed' the air into the ramjet. Using shape stabilisation should allow us to not run any other form of stabilisation so we don't have to bother with collapsable fins or things that eat up case volume. The ramjet uses an aerospike nozzle instead of a bell-nozzle. This is done for a couple of reasons. For one we can't use the centre of the shell because it's taken by the penetrator, and two, it might allow us to steer the shell by blocking the flow through one side of the aerospike. But we're not really sure if that's practically possible.

Side view:

clo2c0p.png

Inside:

BpsyOof.png

Detail shot:

7C3UMB7.png

Note that this is a very crude model. A finished model would have a different inlet, different aerospike, etc etc. There's room in the front and back for guidance and stuff.

White stuff = fuel. 

A very simple calculation done by Colli told us that this design would give us a velocity of... I believe it was in the range of Mach 8-10 if I remember correctly.

Basically what you're doing is using a tank gun to get the projectile to a velocity where (sc)ramjets work, so you don't have to bother with booster rockets to get to the very high Mach numbers but instead use a gun to do so. Furthermore, we thought of making the penetrator thinner than the conventional long rod penetrators. If you're above the hydrodynamic limit for a lot of materials the thickness doesn't really matter, so we thought about using a rod that's about the same diameter as a HEAT jet. And depending on the engagement distance the shell will still have an amount of fuel left, which can act as an incendiary. If you're shooting at a distance where you've run out of fuel, you're probably shooting at tanks anyway, for which a long rod alone can be enough to disable it.

 

 

This has been written from memory, so I might have a few details off.
Also good job Colli moving this discussion to the infantry tools section, just when we start talking about tank shells. :lol:

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Toxn said:

I'm accordingly going to guess that something Strix might actually catch on for dedicated anti-tank applications.

I'd like to see a 2-3" very lightweight guided mortar fulfil the role of organic HE fire that sturgeon likes, as with the larger HE fill (larger than the 40mm guided stuff anyway) you're making better use of the expensive guidance fuse.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 04.03.2017 at 9:04 PM, Ramlaen said:

*pics*

From what system is this sight?

 

Quote

That is one great image. Islamic State 9M113 Konkurs ATGM striking a SyAA T-55, Wilayat Halab.

C6Eq9f6WAAACYmC.jpg

And Konkurs ATGM used by Ru SSO against ISIS near Palmyra:

C6LQM4sWgAEMQxU.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/28/2017 at 6:26 AM, Toxn said:

The killer app would be something relatively small, cheap and simple to use. Is there any chance that you could make an accurate unguided KEP missile? Or something that just flies in a straight line from the launcher using a few cellphone gyros?

Toxn,

Swizzlestick... OF DEATH

I give you the North American aviation / Morton-Thiokol swizzlestick hypervelocity rocket!

9000 fps, surprisingly light, stupid low projected manufacturing cost per shot, capable of shoulder vehicle and aerial launch. 

I found what I think might be a follow on project called the Arbalist hypervelocity rocket from the 70's or a bit later too.

Weirdly, I seem to have an odd connection and love for weapons projects and vehicles that bear the Arbalest name, or variations on this name.

1. Arbalist hypervelocity rocket

2. Arbalest box wing COIN thing along the lines of OV-10 but sexier

3. Tkb-0249 crossbow/Arbalet... You can't hate this little beast full and semiautomatic ags-17/30 grenades in a drum magazine... For those days when the Barrett just isn't quite enough! Seriously I've thought of this one a lot WRT hilltop ambushers in places like Afghanistan and urban combat both, the ability to lob stuff up over parapets and drop plunging fire down into the rock piles people hide behind to launch PKM ambushes. I'm likely wrong, but to me firing HE up and over the rocks makes more sense than trying to fire into the openings in the rocks using a 240 on a bipod!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Results of tests of Israeli ATGM Spike in India could be fabricated

Quote

   According to the French bulletin Intelligence online in the material "Tirs de missiles sous la ceinture entre americains et israeliens", the contract that the Israeli company Rafael received in India can be revised due to the intrigues of American rivals.

   According to the newsletter, India's Defense Minister Manohar Parricar (now retired) recently ordered an internal investigation into possible fraud during the testing of Spike-LR anti-tank guided missiles, which the Israeli company Rafael produces. In May 2016, the Israelis won a tender for the supply of ATGMs of the Indian army worth $ 600 million.

   Suspicions that the test results were rigged began to spread widely in the Ministry of Defense of India by several consultants who in the past were officers of the Indian army. They currently work for two Indian consulting companies that specialize in defense matters and who have contracts with US defense firms. The first of these companies, Argus, is owned by Sundaru Mulshandani and has been supporting Raytheon for a long time. The second one is called Dua Associates and helps Lockheed Martin to deal with local legislation issues and also promotes "business development". These two giants of the US military-industrial complex also participated in a tender for the supply of ATGMs (with the Javelin ATGMs manufactured by them), but were excluded from it, primarily because of the refusal to transfer the production technologies to the local industry. Initially, the request for proposals was sent to companies Rafael, Raytheon, Lockheed Martin, MBDA and Rosoboronexport. 

   Jufding to complaints filed by the Indian partners of Raytheon and Lockheed Martin, Rafael could potentially use dishonest methods to hide the shortcomings of the Spike-LR ATGMs during tests that took place in 2015 at various Indian test ranges. Rafael, it is believed, then turned to several members of the committee to assess the testing of missiles in order to convince them at any cost (first of all, by financial methods) to choose a Spike-LR missile. This fact can explain the difference in the characteristics obtained in the test reports and the final report, prepared by the Indian Army Headquarters a few months later.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Similar Content

    • By Gripen287
      Do you like pontificating on the infantryman's load? Want to see how different gear choices affect said load?  If so, check out this spreadsheet including an itemized list of "best of breed" (IMHO) gear! Download it and customize to suit your own preferred equipment.  The "Configured Totals" section should auto-calculate weights and ammunition totals for your selected items, and you can copy and paste "Configured Totals" values into the light and heavy load sections for comparison. 
       
      I've tried to provide a fairly comprehensive list of gear for the rifle squad and machine gun teams.  A few items are notional, and those should be noted as such. I've also tried to balance both lightness and capability.  I, however, mostly intend this spreadsheet to serve as an outline and handy way to calculate total values for any items you choose to add or change.
       
      While I'm sure there are a more than a few errors, this spreadsheet is merely intended as a starting point for your own explorations, and I am NOT likely to maintain this particular version. Enjoy!
       
      Infantry Packlist Spreadsheet
    • By LoooSeR
      Hello, my friends and Kharkovites, take a sit and be ready for your brains to start to work - we are going to tell you a terrible secret of how to tell apart Soviet tanks that actually works like GLORIOUS T-80 and The Mighty T-72 from Kharkovites attempt to make a tank - the T-64. Many of capitalists Westerners have hard time understanding what tank is in front of them, even when they know smart words like "Kontakt-5" ERA. Ignoramus westerners!
       
       
         Because you are all were raised in several hundreds years old capitalism system all of you are blind consumer dummies, that need big noisy labels and shiny colorful things to be attached to product X to be sold to your ignorant heads and wallets, thats why we will need to start with basics. BASICS, DA? First - how to identify to which tank "family" particular MBT belongs to - to T-64 tree, or T-72 line, or Superior T-80 development project, vehicles that don't have big APPLE logo on them for you to understand what is in front of you. And how you can do it in your home without access to your local commie tank nerd? 
       
       
         Easy! Use this Putin approved guide "How to tell appart different families of Soviet and Russian tanks from each other using simple and easy to spot external features in 4 steps: a guide for ignorant western journalists and chairborn generals to not suck in their in-depth discussions on the Internet".
       
       
       
      Chapter 1: Where to look, what to see.
       
      T-64 - The Ugly Kharkovite tank that doesn't work 
       
         We will begin with T-64, a Kharkovite attempt to make a tank, which was so successful that Ural started to work on their replacement for T-64 known as T-72. Forget about different models of T-64, let's see what is similar between all of them.
       
       
       

       
       
         
       
       
      T-72 - the Mighty weapon of Workers and Peasants to smash westerners
       
         Unlike tank look-alike, made by Kharkovites mad mans, T-72 is true combat tank to fight with forces of evil like radical moderate barbarians and westerners. Thats why we need to learn how identify it from T-64 and you should remember it's frightening lines!
       

       
       
       
      The GLORIOUS T-80 - a Weapon to Destroy and Conquer bourgeois countries and shatter westerners army
       
         And now we are looking at the Pride of Party and Soviet army, a true tank to spearhead attacks on decadent westerners, a tank that will destroy countries by sucking their military budgets and dispersing their armies in vortex of air, left from high-speed charge by the GLORIOUS T-80!

      The T-80 shooting down jets by hitting them behind the horizont 
          
    • By LoooSeR
      T-14 ARMATA 
      (edited)
              This thread is about glorious russian MBT T-14, known as "Armada", "T-95", "black eagle", "T-99" and other stupid Western names given to Object 148 (T-14 in some recent documents). Here is number of images connected to that vehicle.
       

      Official model of unknown "artillery vehicle". Yeah, Putin, we know that this is T-14. Note Gatling gun on turret right side.
       
      Artist impression of T-14 based on known model, by Fyodor Podporin. 
       

      T-14 will use Relikt ERA, which is considerable improvement over Kontakt-5 in resisting to tandem HEAT warheads and EFPs.

       
      Side skirts would be thicker on a real vehicle, i think. Relikt have AFAIK bigger size than Kontakt-5 ERA build-in blocks.

       
       
       
       
       
      Whole album with renders: 
      http://imgur.com/a/8Tn9b
       
      Video of same render from same artist:

       
       
            People expect that tank would have turret weapon system like what you see on the BMP-3 "Bakhcha-U" turret - a lot of weapons in one turret for one gunner to work with. T-14 is rumored to be equipped with 30 (or even 57) mm autocannon, 4-6 barrel gatling type MG/HMG, new 125 (2A82) or even 152 mm (2A83) smoothbore cannons. Turret is unmanned, crew of 3 would be located in frontal part of hull, behind very serious frontal armor inside of compartment, well protected from all directions. Cannon would be loaded by new autoloading device. I hope that Burevestnik is working on them, those guys managed to make 100 mm Naval gun with RoF of 300 shots per minute.
       
            I really like how turret looks, but i don't understand why there is such a big turret "busket" for unmanned turret with all ammo placed inside of hull in special armored housing. Also, i don't see gunner sight and proposed FSC radar on 3D model (i assume that panoramic sight is for commander). Laser sensors on 3D model are from T-90A variant of "Shtora".
       
            Some officials mentioned works on new active protection system, that consist of powerfull radar station, that can work on "long ranges" and engage incoming projectiles (missiles) with that gatling MG. Will this system survive development stage and be presented on serial tanks is unknown. Although turret for T-15 Armata-based IFV already was shown with new APS "Afganit".
       
            If you pay attention you may see that artist used T-80 rollers for Armata chassis, and this is not a mistake - according to some sources Armata heavy chassis will use T-80 or T-80-like rollers to save weight. And looking at rear part of that tank you may notice a engine deck from gas-turbine equipped version of the T-80, which can be mistake becuase MoD want Armata with new ~1500 HP diesel engine. 
    • By Marsh
      The Magach based Spike launcher, the Pereh or Wild has been officially revealed. Thanks to "Camera" at the Mess for the heads up. The vehicle has been in service for 30 years!
      Links currently available in Hebrew only. 
       
      Cheers
      Marsh
       
      http://www.fresh.co.il/vBulletin/t-5...�לי_תמוז
       
      http://www.israeldefense.co.il/he/co...�רא-נחשף
       
      https://www.facebook.com/mazidf/phot...type=1&theater

×
×
  • Create New...