What's new

Rafael Releases New Member of Spike Family - Spike NLOS

RPG in air and mortar have similar ballistic trajectory as Spike. How on earth u are going to sellect them? Pantsyr is very losy system by the way. TOR for poor. :lol:

Thats why KBP sold more then 213 Pantsir-S1, world wide, and I am not even counting the Russian order something Israel could never hope to match with any of its SAM systems. If Russian SAMs are so bad then why did Isreal go Moscow severel times begging the Russians not too sell the S-300 to Iran becasue it might take away their air-superiority:eek:
 
. .
RPG in air and mortar have similar ballistic trajectory as Spike. How on earth u are going to sellect them? Pantsyr is very losy system by the way. TOR for poor. :lol:

Pantsyr is 'losy' and Tor is poor yet primitive systems such as ZSU-23's accounted for at least 40 down Israeli aircraft while the SA-6 accounted for another 40. Than there are other systems such as the SA-2's and SA-7's. In all Israel sources claim 115 aircraft lost--at the high end while US and Soviet sources believe that the numbers were much higher. No matter the claims we know that Israeli losses to SAM were extremely high.

There is a reason that Israel was alarmed over the possible sale of the S-300 to Iran, Israel went to the point of selling UAV's to Russia in exchange of denying Iran the S-300. The Israelis are not stupid, they know that if Iran obtained modern Russian SAM's that Israel would have a repeat of what happened during Yom Kippur. If Russian technology was so poor (as you often state) Israeli officials would not come to make bargains. Israel knows that Russian SAM's have accounted for thousands of enemy aircraft losses. Only fanboys with zilch knowledge about Russian military equipment would make claims degrading Russian weapons.

A little education lesson, Lockheed Martin purchased and used several systems from Russia, so you can continue to beat the same old drums of Russians not being advanced and having poor electronics but the fact remains that many western countries including the United States has purchased systems from Russia and not just for evaluation but for actual use.
 
. .
Pantsyr is 'losy' and Tor is poor
I did not say that Tor is poor. I said that Pantsyr is Tor for poor. Those who cant afford Tor buy Pantsyr. Tor is excellent system. Cheers.
 
.
Pantsyr is 'losy' and Tor is poor yet primitive systems such as ZSU-23's accounted for at least 40 down Israeli aircraft while the SA-6 accounted for another 40. Than there are other systems such as the SA-2's and SA-7's. In all Israel sources claim 115 aircraft lost--at the high end while US and Soviet sources believe that the numbers were much higher. No matter the claims we know that Israeli losses to SAM were extremely high.
.
you came late but with a bang...thread is going to be concluded with your arrival:mod:
 
.
With bad guidance performance cant be good. Thats why no one buys that except beggas Syria.
So system is bad and Syria bought it because they are "beggas"? OK I get it.


If you seriously believe that in combat situation u will target specific spot of mobile target then you are really nuts.
What specific? It is, front, or side.

So u just confirm that its not necessary to repeat "after ERA" all the time. For tandem warhead its obvious.
? No. They explicitly state capabilities and is done as that by KBP. Whatever marketing figures can give other companies, is not related.

This ERA does not work against tandem. 700 mm tandem is super overkill.
It shows not specifically ERA variant but it´s location on a tank. And modern tanks have anti-tandem ERA in full effectiveness. It can be easily upgraded on any tank.

It does attack I can show u videos.
I will be pleased to watch.

Sensor on missile can see Kornets laser but sensor on tank cant? MAGIC? :eek: :lol: Merkava sensors works against beam ride. I showed u link.
Kornet is directly looking at laser beam. Merkava will not detect such a weak radiation unless it hits directly on the apparate, which is impossible. If you modify sensor to detect such a weak laser, it will be giving false signals all the time it sees any sort of radiation in the battlefield, even those not directed against it.

TOW has double warhead attacking top. No tank in the workd can survive. Last time I repeat that.
Then I will not argue more, but your knowledge on that is very limited.

Cases with LOS view beyond 4.5 km are extremelly rare. Thats why US did not bother to make.
US could not make an effective system the same they cannot make missiles of 120mm diameter.

In order to guide Kornet u should also see the target. Difference is that Kornets gudance emits laser and can be detected by sensors, while guidance of TOW does not emit and cant be detected.
Kornet follows not target, but laser beam. And system has filters which are not affected by IR disruption. Tow can.


Its useful only in 5% of cases in ideal weather and no smoke. In real battle conditions it will be useful in less han 1% of cases.
The system has a thermal camera which is not affected by smoke or weather.

US exports much more weapons than Russia despite higher prices.
To another Nato countries in behalf of alliance and weapon compatibility. Still think it´s objective?.

That only proves that everyone who wants to buy Russian weapons can easily do so. Even South Korea wth American bases in it.
South Korea has no Nato obligations. I made it an example because despite big US technology influx it still chooses Russia.

India currently is chosing between Spike and Javelin as man portable missile. It does not even consider Metis-M.
Evaluation trials... When they´ll buy and use, then will discuss.

They used T-55 and T-62 which u called "overkill". And these tanks failed miserably against western counterparts.
T-55 is a designation. Tank changed so many times it is not comparable. Same as 1979 Leopard and today´s.

In those wars they were not modern, and for example they were underpowered in gun caliber. Neither there were soviets there so what relation?.

T-80UM is not serial tank is experimental built after the fall of USSR. Stop arguing with obvious, thats pathetic.
Serial models from Omsk produced until 1992-4?. It proves that thermals were available. And experimental tanks are not new build.

1992. And not mass produced.
Revealed in 1992. Developement was earlier.

Lahat has lofted attack and bigger range. It wins.
Launched from tank it is the same as Arkan.

So u still insist on ur ignorance. No one buys ur Metis-M.
Between Russia and Syria they probably produced in higher cuantity than Spike.

Top attack 1000mm >>>>>>>>>>> front attack 1200 mm.
Why do you think it will always hit in the front, and Spike will always hit in vulnerable turret part?.
In case of Kornet, fire from 30 degrees of frontal arc is already ensured destruction in Western tanks.

While driving its very easy to lose LOS and stabilization. At very long ranges chanse to lose LOS is almost 100%.
It is not easy because it is automatic. All needed is to maintain an uninterrupted sight.

U should ot drive anywhere. Just mask down.
A vehicle cannot remain stationary.

Fine if its not in LOS.
If you use Spike in russian scenario in place of Kornet, it will be LOS, stationary and vulnerable. That´s why Spike is only useful in specific mountainous terrain.

Ieven if not in sight, it is vulnerable to helicopters as stationary it is.

Helicopter can survive anti tank warhead? LOL. Superior accuracy of Spike is much more important.
Good luck hitting a flying target with manual (TV (!)) guidance. And Kornet anti-air missile is faster and 10km range.

Displays are cheap. And u can attack different targets simultaneously. Unlike Kornet.
Missiles with seekers are not. How you are going to do that with individual manual TV guidance? :girl_wacko:. Kornet has automatic guidance with networked missiles by computer.

From ranges over 5 km u can see only one pixel. Useless thing. Spike allows u to come closer see well and sellect the desired target.
Kornet camera is automatic, and zoom is optic, not digital, so no pixels. Computer easily recognizes targets. Spike requires to fly around searching manually.

Not at all.
So going to explain? and we are not considering third systems.

Light armored vehicle in LOS is vulnerable. Spike will kill it easily :lol:
Long range Spike is easy to avoid.

Its in covered position. Super safe.
On what scenario? In Kornet´s certainly won´t.

I repeat. In order to guide Kornet u should see the target. If target masks itself by smoke u wont be able to guide it. Difference of Kornet from Spike and TOW is that Kornet emites and herefore can be detected by sensors. Spike and TOW dont emit and cant be detected by sensors.
Aerosol will only appear after launch (Kornet will not activate it anyway). Even if will, Kornet is looking back at the laser, not at target, so it would be still possible to hit.

Spike and Tow in the same position will see nothing cause they´ll loose target to guide at.
No u cant. It does not exists.
How not? it is on sale, call factory, and they will produce. Process is same as with Spike, unless you imply that clients are buying second hand.

U
are really funny of u think that u can shot down tinny fast and low flying target with Igla.
It´s not fast + seen at range + with fragmentary warhead you do not need even to hit.

More expensive than Pantsyr? :lol: Ur dobious effectiveness based only on your dobious fantasies.
No pantsyr, Igla, Shilka, cannons in typical armored formations. Trophy against ATGM does nothing, and it damages with friendly fire.
 
.
I did not say that Tor is poor. I said that Pantsyr is Tor for poor. Those who cant afford Tor buy Pantsyr. Tor is excellent system. Cheers.
What? Pantsyr and Tor are different concepts. Pantsyr is mix of missile and guns on which KBP specializes. Tor has different location technique. They are made by different companies.
 
.
So system is bad and Syria bought it because they are "beggas"? OK I get it
All the world is bying Spike or Javelin.

What specific? It is, front, or side.
Metis-M cant take front of modern tanks.

? No. They explicitly state capabilities and is done as that by KBP. Whatever marketing figures can give other companies, is not related.
So you should prove that numbers given by KBP are diferent from ohers.

It shows not specifically ERA variant but it´s location on a tank. And modern tanks have anti-tandem ERA in full effectiveness. It can be easily upgraded on any tank.
There is no single tank in thw world with tandem ERA. Furthmore if u put same tandem era at front chances to take it out for Metis and Kornet decrease even further. On the other hand Spike and TOW still can take easily.

I will be pleased to watch.
‫

Kornet is directly looking at laser beam. Merkava will not detect such a weak radiation unless it hits directly on the apparate, which is impossible. If you modify sensor to detect such a weak laser, it will be giving false signals all the time it sees any sort of radiation in the battlefield, even those not directed against it.
You dont even know, that laser beam at range of several kms has diameter of several meters.

kors.jpg


If tiny piny Kornet's sensor can sense the laser beam there is no any reason on earth that tanks sensor wont see it as well.

Then I will not argue more, but your knowledge on that is very limited.
You dont understand that two 152-mm warheads hitting the top have more chances to penetrate than one 152-mm hitting the front? :lol:

US could not make an effective system the same they cannot make missiles of 120mm diameter.
Ur fantasies dont interest anyone.

Kornet follows not target, but laser beam. And system has filters which are not affected by IR disruption. Tow can.
If target is consealed by smoke then Kornet wont be able to hit it.

The system has a thermal camera which is not affected by smoke or weather.
facepalm-300x197.jpg


Once again you show that you are just internet kid who never been in army and never seen a thermal sight in his life.Thermal sight is not radar. It is very affected by weather and smoke.

To another Nato countries in behalf of alliance and weapon compatibility. Still think it´s objective?.

South Korea has no Nato obligations. I made it an example because despite big US technology influx it still chooses Russia.
There is no any NATO obligaton to buy weapons from US. South Koreas which has US bases is much more dependant on US than some Netherlands or Spain.

Evaluation trials... When they´ll buy and use, then will discuss.
I repeat they dont even consider Metis. Same goes for many other countrries on third world.

T-55 is a designation. Tank changed so many times it is not comparable. Same as 1979 Leopard and today´s.

In those wars they were not modern, and for example they were underpowered in gun caliber. Neither there were soviets there so what relation?.[/
T-55 which had Arabs in 1973 is same exactly as T-55 which had Soviets in Europe.

Serial models from Omsk produced until 1992-4?. It proves that thermals were available. And experimental tanks are not new build.
No T-80UM never were serially produced.

Launched from tank it is the same as Arkan.
Yes I already got u: Lahat is launched from tank barrel biut its not barel launched. Because u think so. :rofl:

Between Russia and Syria they probably produced in higher cuantity than Spike.
Beggar isolated Syria bought Metis-M, over 20 countries bought Javelin and Spike.

Why do you think it will always hit in the front, and Spike will always hit in vulnerable turret part?.
In case of Kornet, fire from 30 degrees of frontal arc is already ensured destruction in Western tanks.
30 degrees is not always avilable.

It is not easy because it is automatic. All needed is to maintain an uninterrupted sight.
Automatic is not majic. While driving vehicle can easily jump and lose stabilisation it can easily can drive out of LOS (especially at large distances only very limited spots have that LOS range). And as I said driving wont give u anything beside attracting enemies attention.

A vehicle cannot remain stationary.
Facepalm.

If you use Spike in russian scenario in place of Kornet, it will be LOS, stationary and vulnerable. That´s why Spike is only useful in specific mountainous terrain.
It wont be LOS. Hills are everywhere.

Ieven if not in sight, it is vulnerable to helicopters as stationary it is.
Helicopters dont fly high. They follow terrain and cant see consealed targets as well.

Good luck hitting a flying target with manual (TV (!)) guidance. And Kornet anti-air missile is faster and 10km range.
Kornet cant hit any aircraft. Spare me of that nonsense.

Missiles with seekers are not. How you are going to do that with individual manual TV guidance? :girl_wacko:. Kornet has automatic guidance with networked missiles by computer.
Why u switch to missile price now? We were talking about double guidance. There is no any problem to make double guidance for Spike. More over, it is already done:

tamuzd.jpg


:lol:

Kornet camera is automatic, and zoom is optic, not digital, so no pixels. Computer easily recognizes targets. Spike requires to fly around searching manually.
I repeat, even best thermals from 5 km see only a pixel.

So going to explain? and we are not considering third systems.
I repeat, all you need to do is put cross on selected target and push lock button. Thats it. Since system does not emit anything its very hard to detect.

Long range Spike is easy to avoid.
No chance to avoid it.

On what scenario? In Kornet´s certainly won´t.
In any scenario. Find closed position and fire.

Aerosol will only appear after launch (Kornet will not activate it anyway). Even if will, Kornet is looking back at the laser, not at target, so it would be still possible to hit.
Last time: in order to guide, Kornet needs to see a target. If I put smoke, Kornet cant see me and cant guide.

Spike and Tow in the same position will see nothing cause they´ll loose target to guide at.
They are in same position except they dont emit anything and therefore not detected by any sensor. Only radar can detect them (like Trophy).

How not? it is on sale, call factory, and they will produce. Process is same as with Spike, unless you imply that clients are buying second hand.
There is no any proof that it was ever tested. There is no any proof that something beyond plastic launcher exist. Once u find any evidence plz let me know. There is no any reason to hide test pics and videos of missile which is for sale.

U
It´s not fast + seen at range + with fragmentary warhead you do not need even to hit.
WHat u are rambling there? :rolleyes:

No pantsyr, Igla, Shilka, cannons in typical armored formations.
Good luck shooting down mortars and RPGs fired into the air.

Trophy against ATGM does nothing, and it damages with friendly fire.
Trophy was tested in US with 98% of success rate. Thanks to EFP warhead collateral damage is scanty.
 
. .
Back
Top Bottom