What's new

Rafael Releases New Member of Spike Family - Spike NLOS

Another problem of Western missiles with active seekers, and poor launch metod:
********.com - Scary Javelin

Problem is that Javelin entered production after it "passed" an evaluation test, on which it had a fail rate of 20%.
Was adopted despite that, lobbism?

ATGMs with vertical launch are somewhat unreliable.
 
Old missile which is wire guided with limited range? (subject to jam?) Not worth of comparison.
It has enough range and since its codded its not jamable.

This has similar guidance but missile is not comparable still, archaic configuration with monoblock warhead.
It has tandem version too.

The targeting process is performed automatically and target can be designated by a third party, operation mode is the same as fire & forget (but without active seeker on missile). This feature is common on modern vehicle mounted ATGMs, Kornet D, Karakal.
That all have nothing to do with fire and forget.
 
This will may be my last post in this section;as I have already given you ample proof that Russians are able to create fire-forget projectiles
One ton missile? :woot: They try to develope Germes anti tank missile for a decade but fail.

but economically that ain't feasible.
Sure better to replace soldier than spend money on camera :tup:

If you ponder over this statement:

you will acknowledge that this approach is unique & very economically feasible. The operation mode he is referring to is a unique NLOS property of Kornet...where you fire it from one vehicle..& then that vehicle moves to another place; while another vehicle guides the previously fired Kornet to its target. This is rectified by this official statement:
There is nothing unique in it. You should stay in LOS hense being vulnerable.

Well Russian aren't smart according to you;
Russians lag in electronics.

sadly one have to see the timeline Russians developed these guided projectiles suffering high g's before West
These are nothing but recular SACLOS missiles. Absolutelly nothing special.

Its a shame when one compares this
with Kornet.
Not at all.

Now US has Hellfire Longbow and Israel has Tamuz. While Russia still makes SACLOS missiles from 80-es.
 
It has enough range and since its codded its not jamable.
Range is limited to only 2km by wire configuration, warhead as well. "Jam inmunity" is decades behind to what Kornet´s developements were. On what base it is comparable?


It has tandem version too.
The only I´ve seen is that it was developed as a laser beam guided TOW (missile looked the same archaic) somewhere in the 80s and exported in that configuration. Old system which hardly compares to modern Russian ones. If you have info on modernisation, you can provide.


That all have nothing to do with fire and forget.
Process is fully automatic which means that the operator has to do nothing but to choose a target. Besides, it can operate while moving, retreat. And fire & forget implies just that, it is an operating mode, not missile configuration.
 
One ton missile? :woot: They try to develope Germes anti tank missile for a decade but fail.
Nothing wrong with Hermes.
And the view you have is completely unreal. There is absolutely no sense to replace all ATGM with ones with active seekers. They are limited in capability and in range to 2km because of seeker. Replace Kornet, Metis-m, etc with them would be actually a step bacwards.

Hermes with active seeker is developed to be complemented by external systems, radar, etc which is useful in specific roles, as in helicopters, or to be fired at very long ranges with mid course update, but that´s all.

ATGMs like Javelin or Spike without external complementation are a joke.

There is nothing unique in it. You should stay in LOS hense being vulnerable.
You stay out of the enemy´s range while being fully mobile.


Russians lag in electronics.
That´s a half thruth. Electronic lag was never a serious issue which impeded developement of soviet weapons, but the West had serious isues in engineering ability and design which reflect on weaker weapons (missiles) from their part.


These are nothing but recular SACLOS missiles. Absolutelly nothing special.
They are not SACLOS because the process is fully automatic. No manual work involved.


Not at all.

Now US has Hellfire Longbow and Israel has Tamuz. While Russia still makes SACLOS missiles from 80-es.
The only one which lags here is the West, which apart from vehicle based systems has only ridicolous wire guided missiles and underranged and underpowered infantry ATGMs.
 
Range is limited to only 2km by wire configuration,
Range of standard TOW-2B is 3.75 km, TOW-2B Aero - 4.5 km. These ranges are more than enough for LOS systems.

warhead as well.
TOW-2B has double top attack wahead. Thats better than Kornet warhead.

"Jam inmunity" is decades behind to what Kornet´s developements were.
Nonsense. There is no system that can jam TOW-2B. More over, since it does not emites anything it does not provide warning to the target.

The only I´ve seen is that it was developed as a laser beam guided TOW (missile looked the same archaic) somewhere in the 80s and exported in that configuration. Old system which hardly compares to modern Russian ones. If you have info on modernisation, you can provide.
The warhead for MAPATS was developed by the RAFAEL Armament Development Authority of Israel. A tandem warhead is believed to have been developed.

Army Guide - MAPATS, Anti-tank guided missile launcher

Process is fully automatic which means that the operator has to do nothing but to choose a target. Besides, it can operate while moving, retreat.
No, you cant retreat, you should remain on light of sight because its still laser guided. Once u lose the LOS attack wil be foiled.
 
Nothing wrong with Hermes.
Except it does not work :lol:

And the view you have is completely unreal. There is absolutely no sense to replace all ATGM with ones with active seekers. They are limited in capability and in range to 2km because of seeker. Replace Kornet, Metis-m, etc with them would be actually a step bacwards.
Metis-M has range of 2 km.
Spike LR has range of 4 km and can attack without staying in LOS, top attack and consealed targets. Trully a step backwards :lol:

Besides now one is scrapping TOWa now.

You stay out of the enemy´s range while being fully mobile.
No u cant, see above.

That´s a half thruth. Electronic lag was never a serious issue which impeded developement of soviet weapons,
It was very serious issue. For example not a single Soviet tank had thermal sight, while Americans mass produce them since end of 70-es.

but the West had serious isues in engineering ability and design which reflect on weaker weapons (missiles) from their part.
Nonsense. Lets compare US and Soviet missiles:

------------- US ------------ USSR
1970-es --- TOW ---------- Fagot ------- TOW clearly superrior
1980-es - ITOW/TOW 2 ---- Konkurs ------ TOW clearly superrior

They are not SACLOS because the process is fully automatic. No manual work involved.
Kobra and Refleks are manual.

The only one which lags here is the West, which apart from vehicle based systems has only ridicolous wire guided missiles and underranged and underpowered infantry ATGMs.
Lets compare:

portable systems:
Javelin/Spike vs Metis ---- West clearly superrior

vehicle systems:
TOW-2B vs Kornet ---- Equal (since 90%+ of Russian army still has Konkurs then West is super superrior)

helicopter systems:
AGM-114L vs Ataka --- west clearly superrior

NLOS systems:
Tamuz vs (still in development)

Cheers
 
Except it does not work :lol:


Metis-M has range of 2 km.
Spike LR has range of 4 km and can attack without staying in LOS, top attack and consealed targets. Trully a step backwards :lol:

Besides now one is scrapping TOWa now.


No u cant, see above.


It was very serious issue. For example not a single Soviet tank had thermal sight, while Americans mass produce them since end of 70-es.


Nonsense. Lets compare US and Soviet missiles:

------------- US ------------ USSR
1970-es --- TOW ---------- Fagot ------- TOW clearly superrior
1980-es - ITOW/TOW 2 ---- Konkurs ------ TOW clearly superrior


Kobra and Refleks are manual.


Lets compare:

portable systems:
Javelin/Spike vs Metis ---- West clearly superrior

vehicle systems:
TOW-2B vs Kornet ---- Equal (since 90%+ of Russian army still has Konkurs then West is super superrior)

helicopter systems:
AGM-114L vs Ataka --- west clearly superrior

NLOS systems:
Tamuz vs (still in development)

Cheers


Javelin, Spike, TOW-2B vs Kornet-D Russia clearly superior :lol:

Kornet-D - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


AGM-114L vs Vikhr Russia clearly superior :lol:

9K121 Vikhr - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Have a nice day :rofl:
 
Spike ER is clearly superrior to Kornet-D.


Nosense. AGM-114L is superrior to Vikhr (old SACLOS system).


Clearly superior my behind,:woot: now lets compare.


Kornet-D---------------Spike ER

Range: 10Km------------ Range: 8Km

penetration: 1200mm-----penetration: 1000mm



Vikhr-------------------AGM-114L

Range: 10Km------------Range: 8Km

Warhead: 12 kg tandem---Warhead: 9KG tandem

Speed: Mach 1.8----------Speed: Mach 1.3



Vikhr is also designed too hit air targets,:woot: it simply pits the hellfire to shame, a 30 year Russian System still bets lates US missile. Their goes the whole 'Western always superior to Russian BS'.:blah:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Clearly superior my behind,:woot: now lets compare.


Kornet-D---------------Spike ER

Range: 10Km------------ Range: 8Km

penetration: 1200mm-----penetration: 1000mm
1) anti tank version of Kornet-D has range of 8 km same as Spike ER.
2) The chance to see the target from 8 km in LOS is virtually zero, since it will be covered by ground, smoke, dust, fog etc etc.. So this range is just PR stunt.
3) Spike is top attack. The chance to survive 1200 m front attack for modern tank are fair. Chance to survive 1000 mm top are zero.

Vikhr-------------------AGM-114L

Range: 10Km------------Range: 8Km

Warhead: 12 kg tandem---Warhead: 9KG tandem

Speed: Mach 1.8----------Speed: Mach 1.3
Hellfire is fire and forget radar guided. It can hit tanks in any weather and smoke conditions. Vickr is SACLOS missile. It needs to be guided till impact, its very vulnerable to weather and smoke.
 
Except it does not work :lol:
It does not replace current systems because it has no need to. It is being developed as part of a more integrated system, radars, from heliicopters, longe range (100km)

Metis-M has range of 2 km.
Spike LR has range of 4 km and can attack without staying in LOS, top attack and consealed targets. Trully a step backwards :lol:

Because Metis-M is not a new system, but an upgrade to an existant configuration, Kornet, and new developements adopted by the army bring way superior capabilities as compared to earlier systems, unlike Javelin or Spike which due to little improvement, complexity and cost have not been adopted in large scale.

2 variants of force upgrade

1- Shift to new systems with much longer range (to 6km) and significantly more powerful, with semi automatic and eventually fully automatic laser guidance.

2- Shift to Missiles with active seekers by an fire & forget principle whose upgrade potential is limited (range up to 2km, warhead size)

First justifies a full replacement. Second not and indeed old systems were not replaced in the West.

Spike LR is not fire & forget, but directed in flight through a TV camera. That´s not active seeker. Cost, complexity and little improvement in capability does not justify it´s large scale production and adoption, except for use in very specific environments (very irregular terrain), which makes it an unflexible weapon.
Besides now one is scrapping TOWa now.
Tow is outdated as of now. Regardless they have not developed systems with superior capability.

It was very serious issue. For example not a single Soviet tank had thermal sight, while Americans mass produce them since end of 70-es.
Western tank force was a joke until mid-late 80s, besides, Soviet tanks already started to get thermal sights in late 80s.

Nonsense. Lets compare US and Soviet missiles:

------------- US ------------ USSR
1970-es --- TOW ---------- Fagot ------- TOW clearly superrior
1980-es - ITOW/TOW 2 ---- Konkurs ------ TOW clearly superrior
That is not correct. Fagot and Konkurs are different from Tow. Konkurs belonged to the same family as Fagot and was produced on more less the same time as the first Tow. Tow was developed around 152mm diameter since the start due to inferior engineering ability. Konkurs was more compact and lighter developed on earlier Fagot base, and had longer range despite this (4km)
These missiles were not direct counterparts (Konkurs having an older base) but were comparable in capability despite that. Says much of American ability.

More capable Tow 2 variants appeared only at mid-late 80s and in line with that there were soviet improved versions, (Tandem warheads, etc, Konkurs-M). But there is a difference, they were all made from existing missile dimensions, which were much more limited as compared to the big 152mm diameter of Tow, but were more capable despite that. So who builds better missiles?


If you follow developement history you´ll see that Western missiles were more archaic than soviet and they were limited in potential, for example, they failed to develope compact missile components to fit into 120mm gun caliber while soviets had already numerous missiles of 100mm (Kan) and 125mm (Kobra, Invar, etc) since the 70s.

Kobra and Refleks are manual.
I missed? I was talking about Kornet-D. And Refleks is semi-automatic with several firing modes btw.


Lets compare:

portable systems:
Javelin/Spike vs Metis ---- West clearly superrior
Metis-M (version you should compare at that time) is only improvement over an existing base, not new designed system. Regardless, improvement of capability of Javelin and Spike over those are very limited. Same or even smaller range and limited warhead size.

They cannot be compared in capability to Kornet, indeed, they are akward.

Kornet vs--- no counterpart.

vehicle systems:
TOW-2B vs Kornet ---- Equal (since 90%+ of Russian army still has Konkurs then West is super superrior)
First, Kornet is infantry based in origin. There is no counterpart to that. Tow-2B is an outdated missile in wire configuration and due to that, limited in range and warhead. Nothing to compare.
In addition, Tow is more vulnerable to optical jamming (as Shtora-1) as compared to laser beam guided missiles.

Kornet-D/Khrizantema/Ataka vs--- no counterpart
And were on Russian army they use outdated missiles?. Infantry uses improved versions (Metis-M, Konkurs-M) since late 80s with Tandem warheads which are eventually being replaced by Kornet, used in large numbers already.
Vehicle based systems are supersonic Ataka or Khrizantema versions with long range (6-8km). Infantry support vehicles use Bastion complex with tandem warhead Arkan fired from 100mm tube (6km). MBTs use Refleks system. In addition several Vehicle based Kornets are purchased. American arsenal is more outdated with wire guided missiles being they´re base.

helicopter systems:
AGM-114L vs Ataka --- west clearly superrior
It is not an A vs B comparison and B superior because of guidance. Ataka is indeed a more powerfull missile than Hellfire. But helicopters using it haven´t a radar station, so it doesn´t make any sense to adopt Hermes if you can not exploit it´s capability. But future Mi-28NM and Ka-52 with radar location will be equipped with it.

It is comparison of plattforms, not missiles. If you want to compare despite that, Ataka is superior in performance.

NLOS systems:
Tamuz vs (still in development)
Tamuz has a very specific role and that makes it inflexible, made to be effective in irregular terrain. Hermes is not comparable, because it is made for different roles, operates along radar location in helicopters, and in versions with 100km range as long range weapon. Tamuz is completely different role and inflexible if you compare.
 
1) anti tank version of Kornet-D has range of 8 km same as Spike ER. 2) The chance to see the target from 8 km in LOS is virtually zero, since it will be covered by ground, smoke, dust, fog etc etc.. So this range is just PR stunt.
You contradicted yourself. First said that midcourse guided missiles are inferior to fir & forget because of that, but now is the opposite.
Spike ER is TV guided while in flight while Kornet-D Guidance process is fully automatic.

8km is line of sight and targets are visible most times. Important is that you stay out of enemy responsive range.

Kornet-D: Automatic guidance + Firing in move + more powerfull missile + ability to direct several missiles at the same time = very flexible and effective.

Spike ER: Midcourse guidance + top flight = unflexible system valid only for a single specific mission: Fight in irregular terrain.

Conclusion: Kornet is both more effective and versatile as compared to short sighted Spike´s capabilities.

3) Spike is top attack. The chance to survive 1200 m front attack for modern tank are fair. Chance to survive 1000 mm top are zero.

At 4-8km you can choose were to hit. I can assure that not many engagements will be from the front.

Kornet carries a much more powerull warhead (1200-1300m, thought steel density is not a good example because they are specialised to deal with composite armor) Which gives the capacity to destroy a tank from almost all directions (even front hull). Probability of destruction with 1 missile is very high.

Spike´s warhead is not that powerfull because of sensor configuration, besides, Modern tank´s top turret part is well protected:
 
^^Impressed by your knowledge Lidsky:meeting:
Plus I also add up that Spike systems that have to vertically fall on top of the target are prone to be neutralised by systems (that usually accompany armoured vehicles) like Pantsir-M1/Tunguska; while such can't be said about a horizontal trajectory of Kornet family ATGMs
 
^^Impressed by your knowledge Lidsky:meeting:
Plus I also add up that Spike systems that have to vertically fall on top of the target are prone to be neutralised by systems (that usually accompany armoured vehicles) like Pantsir-M1/Tunguska; while such can't be said about a horizontal trajectory of Kornet family ATGMs
Apart from that, they are complex and reliability is much lower. Limited warhead size also demanded to hit targets from top were armor is weaker, but modern tanks neutralise that advantage with armor configuration.
 

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom