What's new

Iranian Ground Forces | News and Equipment

That's because you don't know the history of modern warfare's!

Even the most powerful country in the world (U.S.A) when they invaded Iraq before the Tanks went in they sent special op groups to go in armed with Javelin and other ATGM's to provide intel and take out Saddam's Tanks.

That's why U.S. ATGM took out more Iraqi Tanks than the Abrams!

If your troops instead of AK-47's were armed with ATGM then that Abrams is even more defenseless than some guy shooting at a Safir with an AK-47's

U.S. low casualty numbers during Iraq war has nothing to do with the Abrams tank!

1,Iraq was a badly beaten country by 2003 After 8 years of war with Iran Saddam attacked Kuwaiti and ever since then every single U.S. administration since then (1st US Gulf war) without exception carried out multiple massive bombing and cruise missile campaigns against Iraq's military. Iraq had no Navy, No Air Force & No Air Defense by the time the U.S. was done bombing them.

2.Intel gathering using UAV's. Once US invaded Iraq they ran in built up bases and bunkered down in their bases as quickly as possible and every time they wanted to send troops outside it was an operation that required UAV intel gathering before and during each operation. With Fighter, Helo's, Artillery,... Support ready to go on a moments notice.

3.Advances in light armor both body armor and vehicle armor if you shoot at a Humvee with an AK-47 then most likely than not your a dead man....
For the Safir 7 layers of Kevlar incased in fiberglass added on to the body will stop a bullet from an AK-47 and it's light enough to be added to the Safir for heavier vehicles you can add a few more layers compressed and incased in ceramics for increased protection

4.Advanced targeting & communication equipment and ability to quickly call in Air Support and Artillery support ready to go on command exactly where you need it.

5.And finally one of the most important reason behind the U.S. low death toll was medics with advanced tools in each group and their ability to do quick assessment and call in quick medical evacuations to their base that was equipped with high tech equipment and if required to transport quickly to an even high tech medical facility if required.


A combination of these factors and some others are what gave the U.S. low death tolls after the invasion not the Abrams tank!!!!

Tanks are dead!!!!

This is today


This is tomorrow



So your either investing in fighting the battles of tomorrow or the battles of yesterday!!!

Iran still needs heavily armored vehicles but we need heavily armored vehicles with troops inside that can send the remotely controlled vehicles up ahead in the front lines to dig trenches build basses attack the enemy,,,,,

Iran needs lighter cheaper and easier to mass produce weapons today you have Kevlar, fiberglass, carbon fiber,... you don't need tons of steel because tons of steel sill aren't going to protect you against ATGM and the fact is you have a far better chance developing thermal radars and countermeasures to protect you from them....
In 2006 how many ATGM were used against Merkava 4 . and how many penetration happened . how many Israeli forces died in MK-4 ?
and by the way a humvee can be penetrated by an anti material rifle from several kilometer away. But a tank can withstand that. So I say no the age of tanks is not ended. You just must use them wisely.
 
.
In 2006 how many ATGM were used against Merkava 4 . and how many penetration happened . how many Israeli forces died in MK-4 ?
and by the way a humvee can be penetrated by an anti material rifle from several kilometer away. But a tank can withstand that. So I say no the age of tanks is not ended. You just must use them wisely.

Your asking the wrong questions!!

What you should be asking is how did Hezbullah stop an Israeli invasion without any Fighter Jets, Helicopters, Armored Units, Navy, Air Defense systems, Artillery systems etc, etc while the Israeli's not only had all of those things but the most advanced versions of them in the world?

What matters is how many tanks they were able to disable!!! and It's not like Iran armed them with the most advanced ATGM's in the world at that time! And all they needed to do at that time was disable them... And Israelis rather than advancing had to pull back provide air and ground cover to evac their guys and repair their tanks well enough to drive back or towed them back and they took them back home and repaired them

Despite the propaganda the Israeli were spinning ATGM's against Israeli's was so effective and scared them so much that in a span of 3 years they developed countermeasures for them


Fact is if the Israeli were so happy in any way shape of form with the performance of their Tanks they wouldn't have bothered

Now future ATGM have to either be deployed using tactics that counter those countermeasures or built in a way that counters them!!! And the game goes on....

How many guys do you think an Israeli tank holds? If your after high casualty numbers then hitting tanks is not really a good way to get them.
 
.
What happened to those missiles? what were they?

I'm not 100% but from the way it was deployed I would say some kind of airborne MLRS and instead of rocket fuel you have increased payload allowing to have heavier payloads like bunker busters, more effective airburst,....
If it was me I would make half of them bunker busters and half airburst
 
.
Your asking the wrong questions!!

What you should be asking is how did Hezbullah stop an Israeli invasion without any Fighter Jets, Helicopters, Armored Units, Navy, Air Defense systems, Artillery systems etc, etc while the Israeli's not only had all of those things but the most advanced versions of them in the world?

What matters is how many tanks they were able to disable!!! and It's not like Iran armed them with the most advanced ATGM's in the world at that time! And all they needed to do at that time was disable them... And Israelis rather than advancing had to pull back provide air and ground cover to evac their guys and repair their tanks well enough to drive back or towed them back and they took them back home and repaired them

Despite the propaganda the Israeli were spinning ATGM's against Israeli's was so effective and scared them so much that in a span of 3 years they developed countermeasures for them


Fact is if the Israeli were so happy in any way shape of form with the performance of their Tanks they wouldn't have bothered

Now future ATGM have to either be deployed using tactics that counter those countermeasures or built in a way that counters them!!! And the game goes on....

How many guys do you think an Israeli tank holds? If your after high casualty numbers then hitting tanks is not really a good way to get them.
the point is from all those tanks were disabled only 4 was mk-4 ,and some of them hit with even more than 5-6 ATGM , the Israel problem was that instead of that their soldiers march with tanks they were hidden inside them. and Hezbollah had access to Kronet-E . you cant trike out MBT in modern warfare.
 
.
the point is from all those tanks were disabled only 4 was mk-4 ,and some of them hit with even more than 5-6 ATGM , the Israel problem was that instead of that their soldiers march with tanks they were hidden inside them. and Hezbollah had access to Kronet-E . you cant trike out MBT in modern warfare.
Is Iran or Russia working on a killer-anti tank system stronger then the ones used in the 2006 invasion of Lebanon?

That's very impressive though, 5-6 ATGM and the tank is still servicable. There has to be a way to destroy these kind of tanks though, there is no such thing as invinciblility.
 
.
In 2006 how many ATGM were used against Merkava 4 .
Hundreds from all types against the mk4b.
and how many penetration happened .
One penetration,The tank fell to ambush and the missile penetrated through the back door which is the weak point in the tank - look at the picture.
43_Merkava_IV.jpg


how many Israeli forces died in MK-4 ?
One died , two injured , nothiung happened to the driver.

Another mk4b was hit by one ton explosive device i think all the crew died,the mk4m come with more protection under the tank as well as upgraded armor and built in thropy system as lessons from this war.

If it's help,for comparison in 2014 the namer apc which is a little more armored than the merkava was hit 2 times from kornets and one from rpg29 and nothing penetrate and nobody injured.

About the end of tank era you are absolutely right,as one who fought in gaza i can tell you that tanks give you a lot of options,in 2008 in gaza tank devision conquered the center of the strip penetrated the strip to 2 parts then conquered the shores in just two hours without our help (infantry) and without casualties.
in 2014 the tanks went for a walk in the Gaza Strip like they were tourists
We laughed about that when we take covers during the fighting
They play PlayStation in the tank during fighting with their armor and trophy and air-conditioning and cold water
The tanks are here to stay , you just need to use them right
 
.
Is Iran or Russia working on a killer-anti tank system stronger then the ones used in the 2006 invasion of Lebanon?

That's very impressive though, 5-6 ATGM and the tank is still servicable. There has to be a way to destroy these kind of tanks though, there is no such thing as invinciblility.
Oh you`re quite right nothing is invincible.One of the trends in guided anti tank weapons has been top attack,the us tow for instance has a redesigned top attack variant the BGM-71F with a tandem warhead,another one is the swedish bill 2, and another would be the us javelin and there are quite a few others as well some using direct impact others like the tow using explosively formed penetrators.Iran developed its own tow [toophan 3] top attack variant tho it carried only one efp warhead.The beauty of top attack is that not only is the armor on top of the turret much thinner than the front of the hull or turret but a successful penetration of the top of the turret also has a good chance of taking out the turret crew which are probably more valuable than the tank itself,in addition the lofted flight profile of some top attack weapons makes them less susceptible to anti atgm systems like trophy.
BGM-71F.jpg

Toophan-3-Heavy-Anti-Armor-Guided-Missile-1.jpg
 
Last edited:
.
Is Iran or Russia working on a killer-anti tank system stronger then the ones used in the 2006 invasion of Lebanon?

That's very impressive though, 5-6 ATGM and the tank is still servicable. There has to be a way to destroy these kind of tanks though, there is no such thing as invinciblility.
its a fight that never stop , you build a new armor ,they build a new warhead , then you build even a better armor and then they build an even better warhead.
 
.
its a fight that never stop , you build a new armor ,they build a new warhead , then you build even a better armor and then they build an even better warhead.
I actually had an idea (it might sound utterly stupid and impractical but hear me out lol, and don't be afraid to tell me how stupid my idea is). What if there was an upgrade to the toophan design itself, where Iran would increase the size of the ATGM itself to compensate for an added counter measure for the trophy system that the US, Israel have in place on their tanks.

What I was thinking is that once the warhead gets in with siginificant range of the tank, the warhead will shoot a projectile at the Tank and the Trophy system will shoot that projectile allowing the toophan missile to go in for the hit, all the while there is a second team operating an anti-tank rifle of a high caliber that will shoot the tank in its weak spot that was just opened up by the toophan missile.

I know operator skill has to be high, but if an Merkava 4 tank can withstand 5-6 ATGM's, then wouldn't it be practical to diversify the strategy against in that doesn't solely rely on the ATGM being stronger?

(I know this is out there and not practical, but I think it would be an effective strategy maybe?)
 
.
I actually had an idea (it might sound utterly stupid and impractical but hear me out lol, and don't be afraid to tell me how stupid my idea is). What if there was an upgrade to the toophan design itself, where Iran would increase the size of the ATGM itself to compensate for an added counter measure for the trophy system that the US, Israel have in place on their tanks.

What I was thinking is that once the warhead gets in with siginificant range of the tank, the warhead will shoot a projectile at the Tank and the Trophy system will shoot that projectile allowing the toophan missile to go in for the hit, all the while there is a second team operating an anti-tank rifle of a high caliber that will shoot the tank in its weak spot that was just opened up by the toophan missile.

I know operator skill has to be high, but if an Merkava 4 tank can withstand 5-6 ATGM's, then wouldn't it be practical to diversify the strategy against in that doesn't solely rely on the ATGM being stronger?

(I know this is out there and not practical, but I think it would be an effective strategy maybe?)

Theoretically its possible, but it makes the system far, far more complex. The missile now has to be 2 staged, with 1 stage being much faster than the other in order to go ahead, while the actual missile still has to fly towards the target. Besides, this much more complex system is now more expensive, heavy and difficult to operate. So you have a difficult to move, hard to produce, hard to use system. Remember, ATGMs are meant to be expendable.

Then, to actually hit the weak spot just created is just a recipe for insanity, because the tank has been hit, it will be moving at top speed to evade any further attack - which can be as high as 40 mph for most modern designs. Trying to hit a foot wide target moving at 40 mph over rough terrain is just not feasible. If one wanted to do such a thing, you'd just get a sniper to shoot the trophy turret off.

I think it would be a good idea for ATGM teams to incorporate a sniper team as well now. When the tank is stationary or slow moving, the sniper would attempt to hit the APS turret. If he hits it, then the job of the ATGM is much easier.
 
.
C
Theoretically its possible, but it makes the system far, far more complex. The missile now has to be 2 staged, with 1 stage being much faster than the other in order to go ahead, while the actual missile still has to fly towards the target. Besides, this much more complex system is now more expensive, heavy and difficult to operate. So you have a difficult to move, hard to produce, hard to use system. Remember, ATGMs are meant to be expendable.

Then, to actually hit the weak spot just created is just a recipe for insanity, because the tank has been hit, it will be moving at top speed to evade any further attack - which can be as high as 40 mph for most modern designs. Trying to hit a foot wide target moving at 40 mph over rough terrain is just not feasible. If one wanted to do such a thing, you'd just get a sniper to shoot the trophy turret off.

I think it would be a good idea for ATGM teams to incorporate a sniper team as well now. When the tank is stationary or slow moving, the sniper would attempt to hit the APS turret. If he hits it, then the job of the ATGM is much easier.
I agree with what you say.

Could it be a feasible to say that instead if 1 warhead, there is 2 or more warheads working in tandem. The ATGM is expendable but it's utility due to how many can be easily fielded is very important.

What I'm saying is that the ATGM itself would link up with nearby ATGM and create a sort of battle network in a war zone (most likely modern setting) where there'd be 6-10 (or more given the size of the enemy force) ATGM crews that, once a target or targets are acquired, they would fire in order one after another in order to soften up the target then the latter warheads will go in for the kill (I know that ATGM production is cheap or relatively so compared to other systems).

Basically you'd have killing zones, in which if tank columns are coming in they'd be attacked from a multitude of direction with warheads that are a part of a network rather than small crews that will hit and then move (I do think that this ATGM network can have the crews move around the battlefield and set up in different locations constantly in order to keep the enemy tanks and armor guessing and maneuvering).

What the upgrade to the ATGM would be is basically a data link between each individual ATGM that can show the enemy position from one ATGM to all the others linked in the battle network. Then the other ATGM will prioritize targets and choose which enemy tanks and armor should be attacked. This would be either an external or side mounted screen showing the other ATGM's in the battle work and what they are seeing on the battlefield (this upgrade seems doable and not that expansive also I think it's well within Iran's capability in doing so, after all drones are working in networks these days so why can't ATGM systems). The crews will be able to pick and choose targets that they think should be destroyed and the inforation will constantly be updated from ATGM crew to ATGM crew.
 
.
Nasir Automatic Grenade-Launcher;

Caliber: 40mm
Range: 2.2 km
Rate of Fire: 300 per minute
Weight: 55 kg (300 kg including fire control + Control station)
Fire Control: Smart Image-processing system (Can lock and fire on targets automatically), 5 Degree and 15 Degree cameras, Laser range finder, Thermal Camera
Carrier Platforms: Kaviran Tactical Vehicle, boats and helicopters.

It has two modes of function. Controlled by staff behind control center or to set it on fully auto mode that can annihilate any moving target within its effective range.

1395080109311641789977410.jpg

139508010923222589976810.jpg

1395080109464423189978210.jpg


1395080110011851889980010.jpg

1395080109223872889976710.jpg
 
.
Nasir Automatic Grenade-Launcher;

Caliber: 40mm
Range: 2.2 km
Rate of Fire: 300 per minute
Weight: 55 kg (300 kg including fire control + Control station)
Fire Control: Smart Image-processing system (Can lock and fire on targets automatically), 5 Degree and 15 Degree cameras, Laser range finder, Thermal Camera
Carrier Platforms: Kaviran Tactical Vehicle, boats and helicopters.

It has two modes of function. Controlled by staff behind control center or to set it on fully auto mode that can annihilate any moving target within its effective range.

1395080109311641789977410.jpg

139508010923222589976810.jpg

1395080109464423189978210.jpg


1395080110011851889980010.jpg

1395080109223872889976710.jpg

What did that guy do to deserve to an automatic grenade launcher aimed at him? lol :omghaha:
 
. .
Nasir Automatic Grenade-Launcher;

Caliber: 40mm
Range: 2.2 km
Rate of Fire: 300 per minute
Weight: 55 kg (300 kg including fire control + Control station)
Fire Control: Smart Image-processing system (Can lock and fire on targets automatically), 5 Degree and 15 Degree cameras, Laser range finder, Thermal Camera
Carrier Platforms: Kaviran Tactical Vehicle, boats and helicopters.

It has two modes of function. Controlled by staff behind control center or to set it on fully auto mode that can annihilate any moving target within its effective range.

1395080109311641789977410.jpg

139508010923222589976810.jpg

1395080109464423189978210.jpg


1395080110011851889980010.jpg

1395080109223872889976710.jpg
Do they sell to people? I need one for my back yard. I have problem with Raccoons messing with my yard! This should do the trick! :guns:
 
.

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom