Army orders ALCOTAN Shoulder Fired Anti Tank Weapon System

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

I am talking about the box which is placed on it. It still has to be separated from that box and than attached with new one and than fire again

Yes that's the FCS. It's slid to the rocket's interface and slid out. It takes 4 seconds to slide in and less than 4 seconds to slide out. There's no disassembly.

 

[Gryphon]

Yes that's the FCS. It's slid to the rocket's interface and slid out. It takes 4 seconds to slide in and less than 4 seconds to slide out. There's no disassembly.

Pointless discussion. The rants will go on.

 

[Arsalan]

So you want to say in time of war when thousands of enemy Tanks and IFV and other machinery and soldiers will be moving forward. Our soldiers will need to only one Aloctan or similar weapon to fire and all of them would vanish. I didn't new nuclear armed NASR has been re named Alocatn 100.

See @TaimiKhan THIS is what i was telling you about

@Zarvan
No!!
I just want to ask you that why would all those other countries be investing millions in such systems if it was "crappy" and "worth less" as per your claims?
All i want is for you to THINK about the reasons why those people might be investing in it and not to THINK that whatever you have though about is a word of god and that and only that is the universal truth.

Serbia developed a new-gen rocket launcher - the MM-60.

It is 60 mm, weighs 4-5 kg, has an accurate range of 500 m, and ... disposable launcher.

And after THIS you took pain to mention all this below:

Belarusian company BSVT-VV is developing a new multipurpose rocket launcher called the MM-60, a representative of the company told Jane's at the MILEX 2017 exhibition in Minsk.

"Having analysed recent conflicts, the world market, and potential customers' requirements, we have decided that a portable rocket launcher with a weight of 4-5 kg is the most demanded and highly sought option," the official said. "The launcher being developed has a calibre of 60 mm, a weight of approximately 4 kg without sighting system, and a full weight of 5 kg," he added.

According to the BSVT-VV source, the new system allows the precise elimination of targets at a range of up to 500 m through the use of an advanced fire control unit that drastically reduces the impact of the so-called 'human factor'.

"It can destroy various types of targets, including personnel, buildings, and armoured vehicles," the specialist pointed out.

The new system comprises a disposable rocket launcher and an external sighting system, namely either an optical sight, a night-vision device, or a thermal imager.

"The weapon is fitted with a multipurpose warhead that combines high-explosive, fragmentation and high-explosive anti-tank lethal effects, said the BSVT-VV official, claiming that it "can engage almost all types of combat vehicles on the battlefield".

He added that "the ballistic specifications of the system are planned to be tested this year, while the trials are scheduled for 2018".​

http://www.janes.com/article/70765/belarus-develops-new-lightweight-rocket-launcher​

REALLY??
You really think this was necessary after the mention of "disposable launcher". Dont you know how crappy and 5hitty they are, worth less!! You must be out of your mind taking all that time to even read about a "disposable"rocket system. Absolutely worthless!! What do the Serbs know about anti-tank rockets? Or the British or Germans or Spanish or Americans or Russians for that matter!!

 

[CriticalThought]

Let us say you can fire x rockets per second with Carl Gustav and y per second with Alcotan. Say Carl Gustav rockets impart a KJ of energy per rocket, whereas Alcotan imparts b. Then, in t seconds

Total destructive energy delivered by Carl Gustav = xta
Total energy for Alcotan = ytb.

If yb > xa then Alcotan wins. But you maintain that x > y. Fine. But it seems like b >> a, to the point that yb > xa. Now you understand?

@Zarvan can you please respond to the above?

 

[Arsalan]

For that we have Baktar Shikan and TOW

Baktar Shikan, TOW or Milan II are all wire guided. What we need is a fire and forget missile with good penetration. TOW do comes as wireless but that too is not fire and forget.

Cobra.

I think it is not active now right? It was a 1950s system anyway. Not sure however.

 

[Zarvan]

See @TaimiKhan THIS is what i was telling you about

@Zarvan
No!!
I just want to ask you that why would all those other countries be investing millions in such systems if it was "crappy" and "worth less" as per your claims?
All i want is for you to THINK about the reasons why those people might be investing in it and not to THINK that whatever you have though about is a word of god and that and only that is the universal truth.


And after THIS you took pain to mention all this below:

REALLY??
You really think this was necessary about the mention of "disposable launcher". Dont you know how crappy and 5hitty they are, worth less!! You must be out of your mind taking all that time to even read about a "disposable"rocket system. Absolutely worthless!! What do the Serbs know about anti-tank rockets? Or the British or Germans or Spanish or Americans or Russians for that matter!!

You answer me will you rely on a system which is difficult to carry and in minute managed to fire two rounds only or a weapon which is relatively easy to carry and fire 6 rounds per minute ? And by the way USA is still using Carl Gaustav and getting more and also working on improved version of RPG 7. Also other countries. Spain also has stopped production of Aloctan 100 and hardly any other country has bought it.

The Armed Forces you mention over and over again most are still using weapons like RPG 7 and Carl Gaustav and mostly in far more numbers than disposable weapons.

 

[Path-Finder]

You answer me will you rely on a system which is difficult to carry and in minute managed to fire two rounds only or a weapon which is relatively easy to carry and fire 6 rounds per minute ? And by the way USA is still using Carl Gaustav and getting more and also working on improved version of RPG 7. Also other countries. Spain also has stopped production of Aloctan 100 and hardly any other country has bought it.

The Armed Forces you mention over and over again most are still using weapons like RPG 7 and Carl Gaustav and mostly in far more numbers than disposable weapons.

Hazrat I have to give it to you! You Hazrat are owner of a dungar damagh. Hazrat do you know why Carl Gustav has been adopted by the US? It has been adopted because of the low level conflict the US forces find themselves in presently. As in the conflict they are involved in like COIN which is low intensity thus a system that can work well in a low intensity environment.

If a high intensity conflict ever flared up you will see the return of all the disposable systems, Javelin, M136/AT4 which will dominate the battlefield and Carl Gustav will not be seen on the front.

As for the RPG-7 that was developed for 3rd world markets and to be used by US Spec Ops as RPG-7 ammo is widely available on the battlefields globally. NOT to become a standard weapon in the US military.

As for Alcotan purchased hardly by any country, well Hazrat do you know how many similar systems exist? Heck you were fanboying the RPG-32 which is every way exactly the same as ALCOTAN 100 on this very thread.

@Arsalan

 

[Zarvan]

Hazrat I have to give it to you! You Hazrat are owner of a dungar damagh. Hazrat do you know why Carl Gustav has been adopted by the US? It has been adopted because of the low level conflict the US forces find themselves in presently. As in the conflict they are involved in like COIN which is low intensity thus a system that can work well in a low intensity environment.

If a high intensity conflict ever flared up you will see the return of all the disposable systems, Javelin, M136/AT4 which will dominate the battlefield and Carl Gustav will not be seen on the front.

As for the RPG-7 that was developed for 3rd world markets and to be used by US Spec Ops as RPG-7 ammo is widely available on the battlefields globally. NOT to become a standard weapon in the US military.

As for Alcotan purchased hardly by any country, well Hazrat do you know how many similar systems exist? Heck you were fanboying the RPG-32 which is every way exactly the same as ALCOTAN 100 on this very thread.

@Arsalan

Hazrat for your information RPG7 and Carl Gaustav are used for same role around the world these and Aloctan 100 are different category. HJ 12 and Javelin is different despite being both called Anti Tank. I am clear you need to get yourself clear

 

[Path-Finder]

Hazrat for your information RPG7 and Carl Gaustav are used for same role around the world these and Aloctan 100 are different category. HJ 12 and Javelin is different despite being both called Anti Tank. I am clear you need to get yourself clear

Hazrat isn't HJ12 a disposable system? or is that reusable. I am clear as are many other forum members but it's soley you who is being difficult with fogged up thinking. We have repeatedly explained it but you are being a goat.

Hazrat do you know better than the decision makers in GHQ?

 

[Arsalan]

You answer me will you rely on a system which is difficult to carry and in minute managed to fire two rounds only or a weapon which is relatively easy to carry and fire 6 rounds per minute ? And by the way USA is still using Carl Gaustav and getting more and also working on improved version of RPG 7. Also other countries. Spain also has stopped production of Aloctan 100 and hardly any other country has bought it.

The Armed Forces you mention over and over again most are still using weapons like RPG 7 and Carl Gaustav and mostly in far more numbers than disposable weapons.

You are basing your argument in points that you think you are right about. My question is regarding that thought of yours. Are you suggesting that all those countries i meantion do not care about there soldiers and are sending them to battels with a "crappy" system? My point is for you to stop with absolutely pointless claims and think for a moment about what poosibly could have made those forces invest in such systems. The world powers are investing in thise systems, arent you interested in knowinh WHY?

 

[ghazi768]

I do not profess to be an expert in such systems and have a few of times seen what at best can be termed as 'full dress rehearsals" but I think the main reason ALCOTAN is being adopted is its firing system. That is its ability to assist operator in hitting a moving vehicle or tank with an unguided rocket at about 300-400 m away. Which is tough with other unguided systems, whether rocket based or recoil-less rifle based, for normal infantry soldiers.

I do not think it is to replace RPG-7 but to augment it in environments such as deserts or plains where armour can manoeuvre. It is most probably first instalment of many to arm a number of infantry battalions.

 

[Basel]

Sir I really doubt in time of war you want to use this weapon for only one time. The enemy will not come with one Tank or IFV for that matter. There would be several of them so stop them you know need several of these along with other weapons.

It is shoot n scoot weapon for infantry and will be good in dense combat where troops needs to move fast, specially those on recon.

 

[Zarvan]

The picture is from IDEAS 2016.

Well I would still suggest that Alcotan 100 and weapons like these are best in situation like what we have at LOC right now but in case of full scale war reusable weapons are the ones to be used.

 

[Army research]

The picture is from IDEAS 2016.

Well I would still suggest that Alcotan 100 and weapons like these are best in situation like what we have at LOC right now but in case of full scale war reusable weapons are the ones to be used.

No they are not you buffoon, reusable weapons are heavier in weight and less ammo can be carried as you carry the launcher and the ammo, here the launcher is the ammo and it's a frkin missile system, Carl Gustav is a recoil less rifle. Stop being a stubborn idiot

 

[Mangus Ortus Novem]

Pakistan is buying this weapon for LoC...

Pak Army buys this and indian army pays with it demolished bunkers...

Great choice...but would have preferred a local production of such a system be it under liecence.