Jump to content

Hmmm...Javelin


Recommended Posts

sgtgoody(esq),

Am not at all sure that's true. I say this from the perspective of someone who, back in his military analyst days, watched lots of warhead detonation test footage and has watched a lot more since. The fireball and blast from warhead detonation alone (no ammo or fuel on target simulated) is jaw dropping. WASP (small autonomous antiarmor missile) warhead tests against a simulated Russian composite armor array not only wrecked the array but basically blew up the test cell, too. Fireball was over eight feet in diameter. Bear in mind, too, that the explosives in HEAT warheads are FAR more energetic than mere artillery shell fills.

Regards,

John Kettler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suspect the designers took the "warhead weight" for the "charge weight". A javelin warhead, as distinct from the missile propelling it along, weighs about 18 lbs. But the charge proper is only a fraction of that. Marginally more powerful than a 105mm shell, but significantly less than a 155mm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John,

I've seen my share as well and yes they put on quite a show. The fireball, however is not always indicative of the blast strength. A can of gasoline will blow up with a very nice light show but has little force behind it.

I'm not saying that there should be no effect but the effects in the game are a little much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

JonS,

Zing!

sgtgoody (esq),

In the then-classified WASP test, I got a very high resolution look at the target array, and there were no additional explosives, fuel, or anything else. This is precisely why I explicitly mentioned it. The film I saw showed the detailed interior structure of the array, the sealing of same, the placement of the missile warhead for static detonation, BOOM!, then slow mo and static aftermath shots, to include the precise nature of the damage to the armor array elements. While the main force of such a warhead does indeed go forward in a tightly focused jet, the reality is that an instant later, the warhead casing bursts because a substantial amount of powerful explosive has just gone off inside it. This is also why the M1 tank's 120mm gun has no separate HE projectile.

Regards,

John Kettler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well ok, i know that the Javelin could easily kill an MBT, i would say it's equell to the Russian Kornet or even slightly better, but, how about the Javelin's effect on structures in SF, dont you guys think it's a little too much for it to topple a whole building?

oren_m

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John,

You missunderstand me. I am talking about the explosion of the round itself not the target. Of course the shaped charge warheads have a 360 blast that is quite powerful but when compared to an HE round of the same callibur the HEAT warhead underperforms by a good margin. This is by design as we both know because the HEAT warhead is designed focus force in front of it rather than project force around it.

It is just like the claymore mine. The main force and projects the shrapnel ahead of it but there is still a blast zone all around it. What Oren has noticed is that a single Javelin is capable of bringing down an entire building. This is simply not true.

During the Somalia campaign US forces hit a building with 16 TOW missiles, all of which were aimed at the same floor and then Delta went in to pick up the pieces. This would not be the case in CMSF as the building would have collapsed. I have also seen from personal firing and had it confirmed from friends who have fired them in combat that firing the AT4 at a cinder block building tends to put an 83mm hole in the wall rather than blasting the structure appart as the force is focused on cutting into whatever it hits. HEAT rounds have enough residual explosive power to make them usefull but the army still relies on arty for any heavy HE work. Even the 105 M1 did not carry an HE projectile. Against hardened positions the HEAT warhead is better as it will project more of its force through the outer walls and increase fragmentation effect inside the structure even though its overall blast effect will be lower.

In game terms Steve has already acknowledged that the secondary blast effects of AT ammo has been over modelled and will be changed later.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Zipuli:

http://tietokannat.mil.fi/maavoimat_kuvapankki/include/video.php?id=3

Similar missile (Israeli SPIKE - top-attack, tandem-HEAT) vs. empty T-54... Hmm...

Zip

Without reading about it online, could I draw on your knowledge for an explanation regarding the wire you see after the missle leaves the launch tube?

Not clear on the guidance system for this thing, it doesn't spool out cable behind that thing does it?

The Javelin doesn't have the same wire does it?

Thanks, interesting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

sgtgoody (esq),

Since oren_m led with Javelin as nuke, and you followed that with a big crater argument, is it any wonder that I had no idea your real issue was with Javelin's excessive building destruction capability?

Now that I do understand what you're actually talking about, how big a building are you talking about in CMSF, and how big was the one in Somalia that took 16 TOW hits? What version of TOW was used?

Regards,

John Kettler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by sgtgoody (esq):

Yes that is the guidance wire and it does spool out behind the missile. The American TOW and DRAGON have the same thing.

The Javelin uses an infrared tracker to track the target after the Command Launch Unit locks it on and does not need to be guided after launch so no wires.

Amazing, a guided wire system seems delicate, but obviously works.

Would that make this weapon only effective in open terrain?

Also, can one be launched without LOS and

guided by a second unit with LOS? That would be sweet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, you cannot launch a Javelin from a CLU that is not attached to the Javelin.

Yes, the videos of tanks exploding like giant hand grenades are real. If a tank takes a direct hit into the ammunition storage area, the ammo all goes off at once. Hence the giant BOOOOM videos. But, if you fire an AT round through a tank's armor and it doesn't hit the ammunition, it will only start a fire. It might not even do that.

The T72 in the classic video that's all over the internet was NOT packed with demolition charges. I heard it straight from the manufacturer's training team. They loaded the tank with a full tank of fuel and a full ammunition load out. That was it. It took a direct hit and all the ammo exploded. If you heard it was full of TNT or whatever, you heard wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SPIKE

Spike is Fibre Optic guided. It trails a fibre optic cable which feeds back video guidance. I have used the simulator a lot and it's very easy to use. I regularly fly missiles down the hatches of moving T-72s.

Does not require LOS. Can be fired NLOS and works well in urban areas. Combat proven in the Lebanon. A much better system than Javelin, as recognised by US attempts to block it's sale to anyone bar the IDF. If the game modelled it, it would show just how useful it is.

There are Vehicle and Helicopter launched systems, as well. The can reach out 8,000m, NLOS.

[ August 19, 2007, 12:14 AM: Message edited by: RT North Dakota ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have seen some comments on the Javelin that calims that it has a thermobaric warhead (or that there are versions of it that does). In such case the Javelin's smaller size warhead could very well stack up to a larger "standard" explosive warhead like a artillery grenade. As to the size of the crater that it leaves I am not sure as it detonates above ground and not below (like a shell).

The Russians have a thermabaric RPG called RPO-A Shmel that claims to have the same effect as a 152mm artillery round and it has a 2kg wharhead (compared to the Javelins 8kg)

Link to comment
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
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
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.

×
×
  • Create New...