lofted trajectory means top attack. Even if it hits the front hull, still normal thickness of armor will be much lower than LOS.
Lofted trajectory does not mean top attack, as there is no way to assure that it will hit at effective point. It is only marketing BS. With that logic, refleks, Kornet, etc can be categorised as top attack as well, as they all have similar modes, so I do not see anything special.
for example T-72A hull provides only 170 mm normal protection vs HEAT rounds, but when inclined at 68 grad it gives 450 mm.
In another words, the lofted trajectory provides about 2.5 times advantage to LAHAT even when it its the frontal hull of T-80UD. In case of Al Khalid Lahat's advantage will be even bigger since it has more inclined hull. Plus Lahat has good chance to hit the turret roof of both tanks. So overall Lahat has much better chances to destroy T-80 or Al Khalid.
Funny thing is that you made that amateur drawing, whithout knowledge of neither of both missiles trajectories, and angle of incidence (they are not that different).
Well, if we talk about probabilities, LAHAT will most likely not even hit such target as T-80UD as it's laser designator would alert it, and guidance will be disrupted.
LAHAT can get external designation.
It is not the only such weapon. But let's focus: In visual, tank warfare, LAHAT is useless compared with rest of munitions, in power, and because it's guidance will be disrupted. In non visual engagements, there can be used comparable munitions to LAHAT, so it has no place for tank use, hence it was not purchased neither by Israel, nor Germany, nor India despite it's promotion.
Range is not needed? Kransopol rounds are not needed too?
As for tank guns, they can hit targets at 4-5 km.
Conventional munitions start to be affected by serious dispersion, loss of effectiveness, from 2 km. Missiles are effective at more than double that range, and more powerfull.
Tank always needs infantry support.
Your infantry may not be able to perform all tasks. For non visual engagements you need early warning, to know location of enemy, and they must be tracked by those external means (vehicles, aerial, etc) this cannot be always provided, and this is not as effective as direct engagements.
If tank sets smoke screen and hides itself then you cant guide your laser beam either. Also when missile passes trough the screen it loses guidance and falls to ground.
This is nosense. If there is a screen which does not allow visual engagement, then you obviously cannot aquire target, neither by conventional munitions, guided or unguided. So I do not see the point of that statement.
Obviously, you cannot alert the target if you want to engage it effectively. This is understood in modern warfare. Laser range finders to measure distance, are pointed not at target but at a near point in order to not alert it. Guided projectiles have been developed accordingly, for example using laser beam guidance not pointed against target, but at missile. This is not realised in Lahat, where you need to point directly with laser designator, alerting the target and calling for countermeasures.
LOL. Shtora emiters consume 2 KWt together, thats nothing for 1000 hp tank (much less than 1 percent). And laser detectors dont consume anything (10 WT probably), but they are not installed either.
Among lossess there can be about 50 hp lost in transmission, 150 hp lost in refrigeration, etc, etc. Under extreme hot temperatures this can be exacerbated, leading to serious losses and malfunction. This of course has nothing to do with effectiveness of APS against projectiles, anyway, you should bring sources, to prove otherwise, but I know that already.
).
