Anti-Tank Guided Missles

[Renaud]

Originally posted by Kurtz:

A question to the tankers out there:

How quickly can you fire at a detected target? Of course this depends partly on how much the turret have to be turned, but could you give an estimate if the target is "forward" or "to your side"?

On longer distances the time in flight of the tank's fire is another factor that ust be considered. The HE round may kill the ATGM crew after the misile has hit the tank.

Hydraulic M1 turret is very fast. Lemme see, hmmm, here's a little scenario:

Tank moving forward, open desert, unbuttoned TC spots 3 flashes and smoke puffs at guestimated 2000+ meters, 60 degrees right. 1) TC yells 'SAGGER SAGGER SAGGER RIGHT SIDE!' while reaching down for the override to orient the gun tube toward the area by eyeball (3-5 sec). 2) Gunner acquires the target at 3x, switches to 10x, lases the target or area, verifies a good range is returned, yells 'IDENTIFIED!' during this process (3-5 sec). During this time the driver will accelerate and swerve in sharp arcs toward the right; 3) TC yells 'FIRE!'; Gunner yells 'ON THE WAY' and fires whatever he has in the tube, probably a SABOT . Loader reloads HEAT (there is no 120mm HE) and that one should be flying in 5-6 seconds.

TOTAL TIME: 8-10 seconds. 15 sec until 2nd round. Flight time of 120mm rounds is negligible.

If I was within 1000 meters or so we would use coax M240 instead.

The TC .50 is really useless when you are swerving around like that. The loader's M240 is useless generally, but especially moving and over 200 meters.

oh yea, forgot to say that the effect of this fire on the ATGM guy may be negligible, especially if it's a remote launcher. If it's a hull-down vehicle like a BRDM there's a good chance we'll knock out 2 with the 1st and 2nd shots. If a man is visible with the launcher, we may well hit him as humans are easily visible in thermals. Guys hit coyotes with sabot from 1500 meters at night.

If it's a javelin or similiar, you never saw the launch in the first place.

[ October 15, 2005, 10:40 AM: Message edited by: Renaud ]

[Kurtz]

Interesting, Renaud.

Sounds like everything depends on spotting the actual launch. And after that, knowing which of the thermal signatures is the gunner.

8-10 seconds before the gun is in the right direction and ready to fire. It sounds like this won't be enough on short distances or fast missiles. If the range was 1000 meters you might not have time to fire back before the missile hits. It would take almost as long time before you could fire the coax MG, right?

Sorry to remind you of this.

What about the smoke grenade launchers? Are they used in a scenario like this, or is attack the prefered solution?

Salkin: We didn't have those modern MT-LBs back in the day (89), they were still used by the enemy. We walked or rode in a soft-skinned vehicle (TGB13).

[Renaud]

Coax could start firing in 8-10 as well. This is some guesswork, a crack crew might be a few seconds faster, as little as 6. A confused crew might take 20 seconds, who knows.

I would say most times you will be hit b4 you spot a flank ATGM launch. We are really talking about dismounted ATGM's with remote controls. If you can start swerving then old style ATGM's like AT3 may have a hard time hitting you, especially fired by unskilled troops. The 2 smoke salvoes available would be great on calm days if you are stationary or backing away into cover (like behind a building/berm), and the ATGM is not a state-of-the-art model with active thermal sights. There's the engine smoke generator, but I think that would just confuse and obscure LOF for other friendlies, particularly those without active thermals, who should be engaging too.

I'm confident the AT-3 or below can't penetrate front of M1A1 or M1A2 or most crew areas of the side hull (due to the front 2/3rd 3" standoff composite skirts - does not cover engine area). It might penetrate the turret side (250mm or so of composite)...I couldn't guess on that matchup.

Catastrophic kills are going to be hard to come by with M1, it's well compartmented and tough. Mostly you are going to blow out the engine or ammo compartments while the crew survives. A top-attack ATGM may take the crew compartment out.

When a javelin hits a loaded T72 the T72 completely disintegrates and the turret flies about 150 feet in the air, don't know if you've seen the videos.

[Andrew H.]

Originally posted by Renaud:

Lemme see, hmmm, here's a little scenario:

[snip]

You forgot to add that the tank is not alone, but is accompanied by the other tanks in its company, some of whom also spotted the sagger, and some of whose turrets are probably already pointed in the right direction...

[Panzer76]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

The missile, if it is supposed to hit, will hit.

Steve

Does this mean that we will retain the "feature" from CM1 where a tank in motion could be hit while it was out of LOS because it was in LOS when the "hit" was calculated?

[Warmonger2005]

Kurtz you should write novels. You could be the next Harold Coyle or Tom Clancy. It is sure great that we have all these vets who can share thier experences with us civilian types. Thanks a lot guys.

Warmonger

[Warmonger2005]

Opps I mean Renaud should be writing novels!!!!!!!!

[Peter Cairns]

The assumption seems to be that suppression fire against ATGM crews won't start till the thing is fired.

I'd expect ahead and falnks to be covered at all times for infantry movemnet and suppression fire to be piled on anything that even hinted at an ATGM. The key isn't whether you actually hit the firer, but whether he thinks you might and bottles his shot because of it.

I know an ex SAS man who was doing contract work in Iraq beside US National Guard and he and his mates thought it was a huge laugh that the NG guys would hit the dirt when they heard a mortar round, as within seconds they could tell that it wouldn't land within a ball park of them

I am not getting at the NG, it's just about experience and perception.

ARH's (Advanced rec helo) would also have a crucial role here particularly on the flanks.

Another factor no one has mentioned is smoke simple obsuring the view to the target in the terminal stage,could make a difference.

Peter.

[Peter Cairns]

I think this is more the kind of thing you need to be worrying about.

The 9M123-2 and 9M123F-2 missiles

The system uses the 9M123-2 Hrizantema (Chrysantemum) ATGM which has a maximum range of 6000 m. and a maximum speed of 400 m./s. which makes it supersonic. It has a tandem HEAT warhead which can penetrate over 1000 mm. of steel armor protected with ERA. It can be guided in both ACLOS or SACLOS mode. The missile is stored and carried in a container which is also used as a launch tube.

A missile with a HE warhead is also developed and it is designated 9M123F-2 (F for Fugasnaya - high-explosive). It is inteded for destroying various battlefield fortifications and manpower.

Technical characteristics for the 9K123 Hrizantema ATGM system:

Guidance: ACLOS (radar guidance in MMW)

SACLOS (laser beam guidance)

Service entry: 1998 (expected)

Missile: Designation: 9M123-2

Warhead type: HEAT(t)

Maximum range: 6000 m.

Flight speed: ~ 400 m./s. (supersonic)

Penetration: over 1000 mm. of RHA

Propellant: solid fuel

First-round hit probability: over 95% (with ACLOS)

Firing Post: Designation: 9P157-2 (tank destroyer).

Peter.

[Peter Cairns]

Oh and there is this one too.

http://warfare.ru/?linkid=1664&catid=261ℑ=437

AT-14 / 9K135 Kornet

Discuss Email

Video Additional

Competitors:

FGM-148 Javelin Compare

Launcher weight, kg 26

Thermal sight weight, kg 11

Guidance system semiautomatic laser beam riding

Missile weight (with container), kg 29

Warhead types tandem hollow-charge, HE

Firing range, m 100 ... 5,500 (100 ... 3,500 m at night)

Missile calibre, mm 152

Missile length, mm 1,200

Cyclic rate of fire rds/min 1 ... 2

Operating temperature range, °C -20 ... +60

The KORNET-E ATGM system is intended to destroy modern and future tanks protected with explosive reactive armour, hardened point targets (i.e., hull-down tanks, pillboxes, fortifications) and small-size targets, as well as structures and troops in the open.

The key features of the KORNET-E ATGM system are semi-automatic laser beam guidance system and thermal imaging sight for night operation. The launcher unit is easy to carry and mount in different types of vehicles owing to its small dimensions, light weight, and simplicity in disassembling. Modular design and small-size of its guidance system allow this weapon to be used on various vehicles.

The system stands out owing to its high immunity to jamming of laser beam guidance channel in combat operations. A thermal sight is provided to fire at night. The system can be used in various climatic conditions and geographic regions, in high mountainous areas and over a water surface. The effective tandem hollow-charge warhead is capable to engage existing and future tanks at any angles of approach. The HE warhead with thermobaric effect can effectively destroy various fortifications, missile launchers, and soft-skinned targets. The system does not require tests during its storage and employment.

Peter.

[Vanir Ausf B]

Is Syrian known to have the 9M123-2 or 9M123F-2?

[Midnight Warrior]

From the above one can conclude that if the Syrian's are going to have to fight with 30 year Sagger missiles, etc they are going to be at a big dissadvantage when going against US armor. On the other hand if they are given new stuff like these KORNET ATGM's then even the conventional armor battles might not be quite the turkey shoot that everyone seems to be predicting.

This leasd me to wonder if the Syrians are going to be given their fair share of these high tech toys in the CM:F TO@E's. Perhaps they can be included in the game with a high rarity factor for "historically" balanced quick battles but this never the less would allow for enterprising 3rd party scenario designers to use them to build more evenly matched scenarios who prefer good old fashion WWII style symmetric warfare (rather than being strictly limited BFC's predeliction for the new fangled assymetric variety..though that look very interesting too!).

TGiven this, even the non MOUT battles might be categorically challenging too (without having to even them out through other factors such as victory conditions, etc). Thus if BFC allows the sceanrio designers a bit of poetic license in giving the Syrians newer technology by including some of the newer Red force technology even if these are not quite yet in the Syrian's armies inventories. This might also in part appeal to the gamer's sense of good sportmanship in that if (God forbid) that this 2007 war between Syria and the US actually happened, as an American I would hope that it wouldn't be anything even close to a "fair fight"! But in regard to the 2007 war being fought virtually with our little pixelated soldiers, having the option to play a more fair fight might add to the over all enjoyability of the game. Thus I guess what I am trying to say is that it seems that BFC and we their customers should be able to have our cake and eat it too in regard to the Syrian player having their fair share of high tech goodies verses having "credible" scenarios that refelct what a 2007 war would likley be. At least that is what I am hoping.

[Redcon-5]

Just for input,(so I feel like I'm contributing) as another tanker Renuad's time frame is spot on for the M1 and M1A1. As a CDAT the dual thermal sights of the M1A2 give the crew a few second advantage ( For Renuad; Check out the engagement times for TT VIII, might have to look around a bit to find them but I know they are out on the web).

As for the earlier comment about picking out the gunners termal signture, (sorry I forgot who metioned it)I have personally read the Name Tag on a pair of BUDs a crossed the motor pool with the CITV (M1A2) call it 150M with 1 inch letters. Finding a person (read First Sergent) trying to sneak up on your position at a 1000M is not a problem.

[Renaud]

The M1A2 SEP is such a tremendous improvement in the FLIR, sights and everything. *drool

The simple 3x/10x magnifications and stuff I refer to above were for 'ancient' 3rd ACR M1A1's in 1990. Looks like 3rd ACR moved to Ft. Carson Colorado in 96 and are currently if not already completely refitted with M1A2 SEP!!!

I also assumed it's daytime with clear vis in my example, but gunner has the FLIR turned on (as they normally would). Basic AT3 can only fire in daytime good-vis anyway.

Hidden ATGM crews are virtually impossible to spot out there in the rocks, before they fire. Just like AT guns in CMx1.

[Redcon-5]

Yeah I got to agree though I only got to play with M1A2(not the SEP). You metioned the .50 cal you should note they change the mount away from that slow piece of ..... powered mount to ring mount. Makes it quicker to fire from the hip but if you have it unlocked while on the move it could break your arm. Almost did with my TC he was a former West point liner backer, and whacked me good on the CVC.

[Kurtz]

Originally posted by Andrew H.:

You forgot to add that the tank is not alone, but is accompanied by the other tanks in its company, some of whom also spotted the sagger, and some of whose turrets are probably already pointed in the right direction...

Just as positioning an ATG in CMx1 where everyone can shoot back at it is a bad idea. Don't bite off more than you can chew.

Originally posted by Peter Cairns:

The assumption seems to be that suppression fire against ATGM crews won't start till the thing is fired.

I'd expect ahead and falnks to be covered at all times for infantry movemnet and suppression fire to be piled on anything that even hinted at an ATGM.

Assuming the rules of engagement allows this. CM:SF isn't World War Three, so firing suppresive fire at every suspected site might not be an option.

Originally posted by Redcon-5:

As for the earlier comment about picking out the gunners termal signture [snip] Finding a person (read First Sergent) trying to sneak up on your position at a 1000M is not a problem.

I wasn't doubting the ability som spot a person at 1000 m with the thermal imager, but if you see several persons in the general direction - how do you know which one is the ATGM gunner and which one is just armed with a rusty AK-47?

[Sgt Joch]

This site lists an estimate of the equipment Syria has.

syrian equipment

Syria is rumored to have about 800 AT-10/14 and 200 MILANs. These should be in CMSF and will be the weapons that give the U.S. player the most trouble. In all likelyhood, they will be fielded be Syrian commando/special forces units, which are the best trained and motivated Syrian troops. The AT-14 has an effective range of 3,500 meters, can penetrate up to 1.2 meters (i.e. 4 feet) of armour and has an optical/thermal sight. This troop/ATGM combo should be the greatest threat/challenge to U.S. armour in CMSF.

Syria has 3,000 AT-3s, but they will probably be fielded by second line infantry/reserve units who are not well trained and motivated and therefore should be a much smaller threat.

[Kurtz]

It´s interesting that Syria had about 700 AT-3s in 1990. The number increased to 3500 in 2000 and is expected to stay at 3000 for the foreseeable future. Maybe not all these launchers are obsolete ones from the 60's? Or have they bought surplus crap to boost the numbers?

Anyway, penetration isn't everything.

Behind-armour effects (overpressure, fragmentation) are very important as well, something early designs often lack.

[Sgt Joch]

That is an interesting question about the AT-3s. According to this site,

AT-3 SAGGER

Most of them were manufactured in the 60s and 70s. There is apparently a newer model, the AT-3d which came out in the 90s. However, I had read in a different article that Syria has had problems acquiring equipment since the collapse of the Soviet Union and that the only missiles acquired by Syria in the nineties were the AT-10/14 and MILANs.

This article has a lot of information about the current state of the Syrian army:

The Military Balance in the Middle East

on page 38, the author states:

"For example, Syria's only modern third-generation anti-tank guided missile launchers consist of 200 Milans, 40 AT-5s, and an unknown number of AT-10s and AT-14s out of total holdings of some 3,390 anti-tank guided missile launchers."

[ October 16, 2005, 03:57 AM: Message edited by: JC_Hare ]

[Kurtz]

If the gunner use the telescopic sight, he might be able to stay "hull down"and reduce his visibility both visually and thermally.

More SAGGER info from FAS

The SAGGER A or B gunner must visually track target and missile simultaneously, which requires extensive training and constant practice. Although the missile leaves the launcher armed and can detonate and kill at very short range, it can be captured by the gunner only at ranges of 500 to 800 meters. Under combat conditions, however, most gunners probably will be able to engage targets successfully only between 1,000 and 3,000 meters. The missile has a very long flight time to the target (12.5 seconds to 1,500 meters; 25 seconds to 3,000 meters), and evasive action is effective against it, especially at long ranges. Although a SAGGER launching gives off a cloud of gray smoke and a loud roar, this signature is difficult to detect on the battlefield. The wire-guided missile is invulnerable to electronic countermeasures and has a very small percentage of malfunctions.

From the Wikipedia article linked by JC_Hare:

While early estimates of the missile hitting the target ranged from 90% to 60% experience has shown that it is really between 25% and 2% depending on the situtation and skill of the operator. MCLOS requires considerable skill on the part of the operator: reportedly it takes 2,300 simulated firings to become proficient with the missile as well as 50 to 60 simulated firings a week to maintain the skill level.

Some other intersting snippets:

"The guidance panel can be located up to 15 meters from the launcher, and can control up to four launchers."

"One missile can be set up, checked out, and fired in five minutes (12 to 15 minutes for all four missiles). "

5 minutes!!! :eek:

I don't remember exactly the time limit for the BILL, but it was more like 10-15 seconds from carrying the system disassembled to first missile fired.

[aka_tom_w]

Originally posted by Panzer76:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

The missile, if it is supposed to hit, will hit.

Steve

Does this mean that we will retain the "feature" from CM1 where a tank in motion could be hit while it was out of LOS because it was in LOS when the "hit" was calculated? </font>

[aka_tom_w]

With this weapon system ALONE the Syrian's will be very dangerous. It looks like they are newer more modern and less likely to fail in combat then anything else. Which speaks to what some else said about the game, forget the range, "if you can see it you can kill it".

interesting

-tom w

Originally posted by Peter Cairns:

Oh and there is this one too.

http://warfare.ru/?linkid=1664&catid=261ℑ=437

AT-14 / 9K135 Kornet

Discuss Email

Video Additional

Competitors:

FGM-148 Javelin Compare

Launcher weight, kg 26

Thermal sight weight, kg 11

Guidance system semiautomatic laser beam riding

Missile weight (with container), kg 29

Warhead types tandem hollow-charge, HE

Firing range, m 100 ... 5,500 (100 ... 3,500 m at night)

Missile calibre, mm 152

Missile length, mm 1,200

Cyclic rate of fire rds/min 1 ... 2

Operating temperature range, °C -20 ... +60

The KORNET-E ATGM system is intended to destroy modern and future tanks protected with explosive reactive armour, hardened point targets (i.e., hull-down tanks, pillboxes, fortifications) and small-size targets, as well as structures and troops in the open.

The key features of the KORNET-E ATGM system are semi-automatic laser beam guidance system and thermal imaging sight for night operation. The launcher unit is easy to carry and mount in different types of vehicles owing to its small dimensions, light weight, and simplicity in disassembling. Modular design and small-size of its guidance system allow this weapon to be used on various vehicles.

The system stands out owing to its high immunity to jamming of laser beam guidance channel in combat operations. A thermal sight is provided to fire at night. The system can be used in various climatic conditions and geographic regions, in high mountainous areas and over a water surface. The effective tandem hollow-charge warhead is capable to engage existing and future tanks at any angles of approach. The HE warhead with thermobaric effect can effectively destroy various fortifications, missile launchers, and soft-skinned targets. The system does not require tests during its storage and employment.

Peter.

[Redcon-5]

[/qb]

[John D Salt]

Originally posted by Redcon-5:

[snips]

P.S.- I wonder if you shoot a war sabot down the path of a incoming ATGM will the shock wave of the passing sabot screw in up?

In the good old days, when the basic M-1 carried the L7 105mm gun, I believe that there was an idea that the gunner might do some good by firing a beehive round down the missile bearing. If the Sagger gunner was close enough he might be at least distracted by the passage of large numbers of flechettes, and if not, then the missile or its guidance wire might suffer damage from one of them.

I have never heard of this sort of technique being used successfully either in training or in combat, and the modern way to do this is with an active DAS of some sort, like the fSov Arena or Shtora. I don't believe any Western powers will be fielding an active DAS by the year CM:SF is set in, but might the Syrians have a few DAS-equipped MBTs, just to annoy Javelin gunners?

All the best,

John.

[Battlefront.com]

Does this mean that we will retain the "feature" from CM1 where a tank in motion could be hit while it was out of LOS because it was in LOS when the "hit" was calculated?

No, the opposite. Intermediate terrain will be a factor now thanks to several nights of late night coding by Charles. He as sure he couldn't do it and keep the hardware requirements low enough, but he found some 'trick' to get a realistic result without killing the hardware.

What I was talking about, specifically, is that if a missile is fire and forget or a controller that is "unmolsted" (in the case of Human guided), the missile will find and strike it's target regardless of a player's direction of the unit itself. I suppose there are some limited circumstances where the player might be able to trick avoid a missile hit, but these are so few and specialized that I don't think there will be problems with this. It also depends on some other stuff we might do/not do

Steve