sniper explodes ATGM

[Drusus]

Well, a 81mm mortar tube weighs about 20kg and I think it is about a meter long. If we are talking about 120mm mortar then the tube is something like 200kg. Also, you would need to hit the exact center of the tube. Is the minimum thickness the amount that is needed to guarantee protection or the amount that is likely to stop the bullet? Last thing is (and this shows I don't know anything about armour): Is there a difference between a plate and a tube being fired upon?

BTW here are some nice pictures about finnish mortars. Pictures

[flamingknives]

the 81mm in British service (the L16) always looks more than a meter and has a breech plug as well, which probably weighs a bit.

The 10mm thickness is usually quoted as being proof against 7.62mm at range.

However, even if it doesn't go through, it will still compromise the tube - a single hole, be it right through or a 'blind hole' that doesn't penetrate, raises the stresses around it by a factor of about three which, on Soviet gear*, is probably enough to go over the failure load

A tube makes it harder to get a 'normal' hit on the target (where the line of shot is at 90 degrees to the plane of the material at that point. Other than that, not really.

* Soviet equipment, especially mortars, tend to be designed to a lesser factor of safety than Western weapons.

[Buq-Buq]

Guys:

As an FYI, there is an interesting discussion on other aspects of the actions involved in this "sniper explodes ATGM" thread over on TankNet. Here is the web address (I'm not sure if this'll work as a link or not):

http://63.99.108.76/forums/index.php?s=85b59d66b68232fb20a79cacca781d13&showforum=18

Click on the subject "Merkava receiving a beating from Hezbollah".

In addition to a sniper taking out an ATGM team, there were apparently multiple attacks against several outposts. At one of the outposts, a Merkava Mk2 sustained 7 ATGM hits, variously attributed as AT-4, TOW or Milan. In the thread, there is a link to a video that purportedly shows three of these ATGM hits. Not surprisingly, the video quality isn't great, but it gives a good sense of what is happening on the receiving end.

While ATGMs are probably not normal weapon loadout for terrorists, the use of these sophisticated and expensive weapons has been on the increase. Several of these ATGM attacks on the Northern border resulted in the deaths of Merkava crewmen while under armor, and created a crisis of sorts in the IDF armor (and social) community, since Merkava crewmen were believed to be virtually invulnerable while in the AFV. Additionally, there has been considerable speculation as to the source(s) of these ATGMs for these attacks.

As an aside on the subject of ATGM vulnerability while in the launch tube, I have a friend who was a Bradley commander in Iraq during Gulf War I. His BFV was hit by two (friendly) DPICM bomblets. One bomblet put a hole in the glacis, and created a puddle of melted armor on the BFV transmission, without further damage. The second bomblet penetrated the TOW Launcher. He told me that they didn't removed the ATGMs to examine them for damage, but that the missile in the uppermost launch tube later became the only TOW misfire experienced by the squadron during the war.

Mark

[Drusus]

The finnish 81mm mortar tube is 1.2m long, so I think it is less than 7mm thick (because of the breech). So, it propably can be penetrated from 300m with 7.62mm AP ammunition. Also, the 120mm mortars tube weights only 100 kg, so it too can be penetrated with AP ammunition. There seems to be two different kinds of 7.62mm AP ammunition, the new one having a penetration of 7mm at a range of 550m while the old one has a penetration of 7mm at 300m. On the other hand hitting the tube in 90 angle is going to be quite hard. This is because usually the mortar is at 80 degree angle from the ground at most (I would say that 70 is the average) plus the tube effect.

Some points: I don't think it is going to be easy to kill a mortar team by firing at the tube, even more so because the grenade is only one second in the tube. Also, I wouldn't fire with a mortar if it's tube was hit with anything whatsoever.

The last point is that I don't seem to have a life. Im afraid I don't have anything better to do than searching if a mortar tube can be penetrated with 7.62mm AP ammunition.

And here is my source about 7.62mm ammunition. I don't know anything about the credibility of this site, but the information is in the internet so it must be correct, right? 7.62mm ammo

[flamingknives]

If you were firing at maximum rate, would you notice that the tube had been hit?

It's probably more likely to be a breech explosion caused by damage to the tube, rather than detonating the mortar bomb.

Breech pressure in mortars seems to be about 110 MPa (or 1100 atmospheres) and I for one wouldn't like to be anywhere nearby if that was to let go.

[Sergei]

Originally posted by flamingknives:

If you were firing at maximum rate, would you notice that the tube had been hit?

If bullets were flying that close to you, I think you would not only notice it, you'd also pick up your assault rifle and defend yourself.

[flamingknives]

That assumes that I'm part of a suitably organised army who has given me an assault rifle to go with my mortar.

[Sergei]

Then you run away.

[Drusus]

I would think there is some big sounds if the tube is hit. On the other hand if you are firing at max speed it means one grenade per 3 seconds. Anything happening anywhere when the mortar goes off is likely to be missed by the crew. I am not saying that it is impossible to explode the mortar by hitting the tube, just that it is unlikely. Not something we want to simulate in CMSF (although it would be funny to see your sniper firing at enemy mortar and the WTF effect of the exploding mortar).

Also, if the soldiers firing the mortar are those seen in the news, then anything happening anywhere is likely to be missed by them. You might have seen the drop the bomb and run away from the mortar thing. It looks funny but it isn't the most effective way to use your mortar. And aiming the mortar better than to the gengeral direction is also going to help...

[Denwad]

Originally posted by Sergei:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by flamingknives:

If you were firing at maximum rate, would you notice that the tube had been hit?

If bullets were flying that close to you, I think you would not only notice it, you'd also pick up your assault rifle and defend yourself. </font>

[lucero1148]

I would think if I was a mortar crewman under automatic rifle fire that would indicate enemy being somewhere within a 100 meters from me. I think bugging out would be a good thing to do, especially if I didn't have a rifle to defend myself.

[Sixxkiller]

First off whats a mortar squad doing being so close to be shot at by small arms fire in the first place? Think you need to find a new AO or get a commander who can setup a better defensive perimeter.

-Ray

[Drusus]

In ideal world mortar teams never come under fire. In the real world things are different. If you are firing a mortar effectively you need at least 3 men. If you want to fire for a longer time you need a fourth men to prepare grenades for firing & carry them to the mortar. And then you need to get the ammo from the supply chain to the team. If you are firing a lot, then fetching ammo from the supply depot to the team is a full time job for one man. Now it would be really nice to have your team guarded from all dangers, but you have only so many men in your team. Another problem is that you can't be constantly moving aroung. Setting up good firing positions takes time.

Whole another thing is that at least in the Finnish system of defence the mortar platoon is one part of the companys defence. That means if the rifle platoons can't do their job then there is still the HQ platoon and mortar platoon fighting. This means that the mortar platoon might end up under fire. Now ofcourse one tries to fight so that the enemy can't see the mortars. Then mortars are sometimes used in direct fire role. If you are attacking then the risk of getting in a situation where you are fired upon is even bigger.

The U.S. side can propably protect mortar teams better than the Syrian side. But no matter what, if things start going wrong a lone mortar team can't always guard itself from all angles. And when things start going wrong the mortar teams fire is needed more than ever. So you can't switch your firing position at will. Which in itself is dangerous*. And many times, and this is even more true for the Syrian player, you don't know what is happening around you. Getting a fire order in rear of you might be the first thing that tells you things are terribly wrong... I must say that my feeling when in the army was that you are terribly alone in the battlefield and you don't know anything whats happening around you. This is something that CMSF will not be able to simulate accurately. The mortar team might not know there is a enemy 200m away but the player will know this. I mean the information from the rifle platoons gets to the player and thus to the decision making of the mortar team instantly and accurately. In reality the information comes late and is propably inaccurate at best and plain wrong at worst.

* During one drill our platoon was destroyed by an enemy AA tank. Firing range was about 100 meters, we were in trucks and they fired with 4x23mm AA gun. Would have been a little messy. Why did this happen? Well, we got an order to switch firing positions. The route was well known to us and we had practiced this. First we were in our forward firing positions. Then the enemy started to attack from the forward and we got an order to go to our other firing position. We were supposed to protect our companys flank. Too bad that the enemy had already flanked us and we were never told about this. That drill was really boring (but I think I learned an important lesson about modern fighting) for us. First we had absolutely no contact with the enemy for some three days. Then suddenly there was fighting everywhere and we got that nice order. I think we fired once or something like that before that order. Our platoon was destroyed not because of lack of training or anything like that. But because of lack of situational awarness.

[Saviola]

It might have been a Kassam homemade rocket

But maybe it was a Qassam.

For the record, Hezbollah doesn’t possess, nor does it have any need for a piece of crap rocket like Kassam. The Kassam rocket is a homemade Palestinian rocket, manufactured in machine and tool shops under debilitating Israeli occupation. In fact, Hezbollah wouldn't be able to procure one even if it sought to.

Hezbollah has possession and access to much more sophisticated and deadly surface-to-surface Russian rockets and ATGMs. Some 12000 of them supplied by Iran by way of Russia and the DPRK. These rockets destroyed the Israeli Abassiah outpost and the six AVs within it in a matter of minutes in the last exchange.

The sole reason why Israel no longer feels adventurous enough to undertake sweeping operations in south Lebanon is because of said rockets and modern ATGMs.

[Guest Mike]

Originally posted by Denwad:

these are the same people that routinely blow themselves up

I doubt it - routinely blowing yourself up gets boring after a while!